u 


ihe  Facts 

Concerning 

The  Mexican  Problem 


WILLIAM  F.  MONTAVON, 

Director,  Legal  Dept.  N.  C.  W.  C. 


National  Cathouc  Welfare  Conference 

1312  Masgachussetts  ATenue,  N.  W. 
WASHINGTON,  D.  €. 


CoPTRiaHT  1926  BY  THE 
National  Cathouc  Welfare  Conference 


THE  BELVEDERE  PRESS.  INC. 
BALTIMORE,  MD. 


INTRODUCTION 


^^The  Government  of  Mexico  is  now  on  trial  before  the 
world/’  declared  United  States  Secretary  of  State,  Kellogg 
in  June,  1925.  Thus,  nearly  a year  ago,  the  Government  of 
Mexico  was  haled  before  the  bar  of  public  opinion.  Even 
at  the  time  this  challenge  was  issued,  the  patience  of  the 
American  people  was  reaching  the  breaking  point. 

What  evidence  has  the  Government  of  Mexico  been  able 
to  produce  to  justify  the  claim  that  the  ^ ^stability  and 
prosperity”,  as  stated  by  Secretary  Kellogg,  of  Mexico  are 
being  established  and  conserved?  Under  the  pretense  of 
enforcing  law  and  restoring  order,  has  the  Government  of 
Mexico  persisted  ^^in  the  violation  of  her  obligations”? 
Are  American  citizens  and  their  interests  any  more  secure 
in  Mexico  today  than  they  were  a year  ago?  How  does 
Mexico  stand  today  before  the  bar  of  public  opinion? 

The  Government  of  Mexico  has  had  no  scruples  in  sup- 
pressing any  evidence  of  hostility  on  the  part  of  the  public 
press  in  Mexico.  Only  a few  months  ago,  President  Calles 
appeared  before  the  Seventh  Annual  Convention  of  the 
Labor  Party  of  Mexico,  to  which  he  owes  his  election  to  office, 
and  there,  in  bitter  terms  of  reproach,  he  accused  the  public 
press  which  opposed  his  administration  and  charged  that 
their  only  motive  could  be  to  bring  about  intervention  in 
Mexican  affairs  by  some  foreign  power. 

Calles  could  have  referred  to  no  other  power  than  the 
United  States.  The  shibboleth  of  American  intervention 
has,  throughout  the  history  of  Mexico,  been  held  before  the 
people  of  that  Republic.  It  was  the  cry  of  Diaz  when 
people  objected  to  his  arbitrary  acts.  It  was  the  cry  of 
Carranza  when  he  sought  to  unite  the  insurgents  under  his 
standard.  We  have  no  more  reason  to  believe  that  Calles 


3 


4 


INTRODUCTION 


was  in  earnest  on  March  6th  of  the  present  year  than  were 
his  predecessors.  All  of  the  Presidents  of  Mexico  have 
known  that  our  Government  desired  only  to  see  stability 
established  in  Mexico  so  that,  under  a Government  truly 
representative  of  the  Mexican  people,  prosperity,  security 
and  independence  might  be  maintained. 

It  was  pathetic,  at  the  recent  Pan-American  Congress 
of  Journalists,  to  listen  to  Senor  Tablada,  who  represented 
the  greatest  daily  paper  published  in  Mexico  and  one  of  the 
most  ably  edited  papers  on  the  American  Continent.  In 
terms  which  did  his  paper  credit,  he  defended  the  freedom  of 
the  press  and  declared  that  it  was  menaced  in  America.  It 
was  on  his  instance  that  that  Congress  passed  a resolution 
condemning  the  Governments  who  deny  to  the  press  this 
natural  right. 

Knowing  the  power,  direct  and  indirect,  which  Calles 
and  his  supporters  possess  to  suppress  opposition,  we  are 
justified  in  going  to  the  press  of  Mexico  for  the  evidence  on 
which  the  Government  of  Mexico  is  to  be  tried  before  the 
world.  Space  will  not  permit  us  to  cover  a long  period.  The 
recital  of  what  occurred  and  was  published  in  the  press  of 
Mexico  during  thirty  days  following  the  appeal  of  Calles  to 
the  Labor  party  of  Mexico  will  be  sufficient. 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


A BILL  OF  PABTICULAR8 

The  following  is  a brief  list  of  well  authenticated  facts 
which,  taken  together,  make  up  the  history  of  the  persecu- 
tion of  the  Church  under  Calles  during  the  period,  February 
12th  to  March  12th,  1926,  as  told  in  the  daily  press  of 
Mexico  City: 

February  12  th — 

A new  Federal  Bureau  is  created  to  administer 
church  property  to  be  seized.  It  is  esti- 
timated  that  the  value  of  property  to  be 
seized  will  exceed  $11,000,000 — Mexican. 

Police  officers  are  instructed  to  renew  their 
vigilance  and  take  summary  action  against 
Catholics. 

February  10th — 

Attorney  General  Romeo  Ortega  sent  to  all  law 
officers  throughout  the  Republic  instructions 
to  enforce  the  anti-religious  clauses  of  the 
Constitution,  that  steps  be  taken  to  transfer 
to  Government  ownership  all  property  of  the 
clergy,  and  ordering  them  to  exercise  special 
zeal  and  energy  in  suppressing  any  members 
of  the  hierarchy  or  clergy,  or  any  laymen 
who,  in  association  with  others  or  acting 
individually,  take  any  part  in  a public 
protest  or  in  any  other  manner  oppose  the 
carrying  out  of  the  Constitution  of  the  Re- 
public. (^^El  Universal,^^  February  11, 
1926.) 

These  instruction  were  re-issued  two  daya 
later,  with  special  reference  to  Catholics. 

(^^El  Universal,'^  February  12,  1926.) 

5 


6 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


February  13  th — 

Calles  wires  instructions  to  local  authorities 
to  enforce  Articles  3,  27,  and  130,  of  the 
Constitution.  (These  relate  to  education, 
propert}^  and  religion,  respectively.) 

February  15th — 

Governor  of  Potosi  banishes,  without  a hear- 
ing, three  foreign  priests,  at  the  same  time 
ordering  all  foreign  priests  to  leave. 

February  16th — 

The  Governor  of  Puebla  issued  an  order  re- 
ducing the  number  of  priests  from  330  to 
273;  ordering  all  convents  and  schools  to 
comply  with  the  Constitution  or  close 
within  forty-eight  hours;  prescribing  that 
no  religious  may  wear  the  habit  or  other 
religious  symbol  in  school;  and  ordering  the 
closing  of  all  chapels  existing  in  any  schools. 

February  17th — 

One  hundred  and  fifty-six  Catholic  schools  in 
the  Federal  District  are  ordered  closed. 
Some  of  these  are  boarding-schools  where 
orphans  receive  free  board  and  clothing  and 
shelter,  along  with  their  education.  No  pro- 
vision is  made  to  care  for  these  little  ones. 

February  17  th — 

Secret  Service  agents  of  the  Government  seized 
the  college  of  the  Sisters  of  St.  Teresa,  at 
Mixcoac,  and  ordered  the  sisters  and  their 
pupils  out.  This  college  had  seven  hundred 
and  fifty  paying  students,  of  whom  tw^o 
hundred  and  fifty  were  boarders,  and,  in  ad- 
dition, one  hundred  orphan  girls  who  were 
educated  free. 

February  17  th — 

The  College  of  San  Jose,  in  Mexico  City,  was 
closed.  The  teachers,  not  Mexicans,  en- 
trained for  Vera  Cruz  to  leave  the  country. 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


February  17th — 

The  College  of  Savinon,  in  Tacubaya,  was 
closed  and  the  teachers  who  were  foreigners 
were  deported. 

February  17th — 

The  College  of  Guadalupe,  in  Tacubaya,  con- 
ducted by  laywomen,  was  closed.  This 
school  was  supported  by  donations  received 
from  a Mexican  lady  of  Michoacan.  It  had 
more  than  one  hundred  boarding-pupils  and 
gave  free  instruction  to  two  hundred  day 
pupils. 

February  17  th — 

The  order  closing  all  college  and  school  chapels 
was  enforced  throughout  the  State  of 
Michoacan. 

February  17th — 

The  Governor  of  Guadalajara  ordered  all 
Catholic  schools  to  close. 

The  orphanage  at  Guadalajara,  housing  one 
hundred  boys,  was  closed  by  order  of  the 
Governor. 

The  Catholic  hospital  at  Guadalajara  was 
closed  by  order  of  the  Governor. 

February  18th — 

The  Catholic  schools  at  Guadalupe,  D.  F., 
were  closed  and  many  thousands  of  pupils 
deprived  of  instruction.  Some  of  the  schools 
were  boarding-schools  and  received  orphans 
without  charge.  No  provision  was  made  by 
the  authorities  for  these  orphans. 

February  18  th — 

The  cloisters  of  the  Sisters  of  the  Blessed 
Sacrament  and  of  the  Capuchins,  at  Guada- 
lupe, were  entered  by  the  police,  the  nuns 
driven  out,  and  the  cloisters  closed. 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


February  18th — 

Fathers,  representing  more  than  6,000  pupils 
of  the  Catholic  schools,  presented  a petition 
asking  the  Government  to  reopen  the 
Catholic  schools  in  Mexico  City.  The  peti- 
tion states  that  the  public  schools  have  no 
room  to  accommodate  these  pupils. 

February  18th — 

A private  Catholic  hospital  at  Jalisco  was 
closed  by  the  police.  It  was  under  the 
charge  of  the  Brotherhood  of  St.  John  and 
not  of  priests;  these  brothers  were  shipped 
to  Mexico  City  under  arrest. 

February  18  th — 

At  Torreon,  in  the  State  of  Durango,  all  the 
Catholic  schools,  and  some  of  the  churches, 
were  closed  by  the  police.  The  fathers  of 
the  pupils  protested  on  the  grounds  that  the 
public  schools  were  inefficient  and  over- 
crowded. 

February  18th — 

The  Governor  of  Potosi  deported  all  foreign 
priests  under  armed  escort  lest  they  might 
escape.  The  Governor  refused  to  hear  the 
appeal  of  the  priests  that  the  Constitution 
only  prohibited  them  the  exercise  of  their 
ministry,  but  did  not  authorize  their  depor- 
tation. These  priests  took  refuge  in  the 
Spanish  Consulate  and  were  later  given  one 
day  to  settle  their  affairs  on  condition  they 
would  then  leave  willingly. 

February  20th — 

In  Ciudad  Victoria,  Capitol  of  the  State  of 
Tamaulipas,  the  schools  were  ordered  closed 
within  twenty-four  hours. 

A Catholic  orphan  asylum,  at  Victoria,  was 
closed  and  the  orphans  driven  to  the  street. 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


9 


February  20th — 

Minister  Tejeda  declared  the  Government 
would  not  desist  from  its  work  until  every 
Catholic  school  in  Mexico  had  been  closed. 

February  20th — 

The  Archbishop  of  Michoacan,  in  an  appeal  to 
the  Ministry  of  Government  in  charge  of 
matters  pertaining  to  public  worship,  de- 
clares that  the  situation  of  the  Catholics  has 
become  intolerable;  that  even  the  little 
liberty  granted  by  the  Constitution  is  being 
openly  violated  by  the  arbitrary  actions  of 
the  police  who,  with  no  written  instructions 
from  any  authority,  have  closed  ecclesias- 
tical seminaries,  normal  and  commercial 
schools,  and  a large  number  of  primary 
schools  which  were  complying  strictly  with 
the  law^,  together  with  orphanages,  asylums, 
and  charitable  institutions,  with  no  regard 
for  the  rights  of  the  interested  parties  or 
for  the  welfare  of  the  inmates. 

In  the  name  of  many  thousands  of  pupils  and 
their  parents,  and  of  more  than  800,000 
Catholics  of  his  Archdiocese,  the  Archbishop 
besought  the  Minister  to  restore  things  to 
the  condition  in  which  they  had  been  before 
the  provisions  of  the  Constitution  had  been 
violated  by  the  police,  or  that,  at  least, 
the  Catholics  be  given  a hearing  and  al- 
lowed to  defend  their  claims  in  the  regular 
courts  of  justice. 

February  21st — 

The  Governor  of  Puebla  issued  new  instruc- 
tions to  all  municipal  authorities  ordering 
them  to  suppress  all  religious  communities 
of  men  or  women. 

February  21st — 

Three  foreign  priests  were  ordered  deported 
from  San  Pedro,  Coahuila,  and  the  parish 
was  left  without  a priest. 


10 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


February  2l6t — 

A home  for  old  men,  supported  by  Mrs. 
Escandon,  was  suppressed.  The  hospital 
conducted  in  connection  with  this  home  was 
one  of  the  best  in  all  Mexico. 

February  21st — 

A private  chapel,  built  and  endowed  by 
Madame  de  Escandon,  in  Mexico  City,  was 
closed.  Madame  de  Escandon  appealed  to 
the  courts. 

February  23rd — 

The  Union  of  Stevedores,  from  Vera  Cruz,  pre- 
sented a Resolution  to  Calles  commending 
his  persecution  of  religion. 

February  23rd — 

Calles  reprimanded  Governor  Almeida,  of 
Chihuahua,  for  being  lax  in  executing  the 
laws  against  religion.  This  Governor  had 
allowed  five  days  for  the  closing  of  the 
Catholic  schools  in  his  State. 

February  23rd — 

The  Governor  of  Nayarit,  with  great  brutality, 
closed  all  the  Catholic  schools  at  Tepic. 

February  23rd — 

A branch  of  the  Anti-clerical  Federation  was 
established  at  Tepic.  Thomas  B.  Corona, 
State  Superintendent  of  Schools,  was  the 
chief  organizer. 

February  23rd — 

The  municipal  authorities  of  San  Cristobal, 
acting  under  orders  from  the  Governor  of 
Chiapias,  notified  the  Rector  of  the  Ec- 
clesiastical Seminary  that  his  institution 
must  close  at  once. 

February  23rd — 

The  authorities  at  Cosamaloapan  refused  to 
allow  the  priest,  who  is  Spanish,  to  officiate, 
and  closed  the  church. 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


11 


February  23rd — 

Acting  under  orders  of  Police  Commissioner, 
General  Roberto  Cruz,  the  police  of  Mexico 
City  took  possession  of  the  parish  Church 
of  the  Holy  Family,  and  closed  it  per- 
manently as  a house  of  worship.  Great 
numbers  of  the  people  opposed  this  action 
of  the  Government.  The  police  were,  with 
great  difficulty  and  some  bloodshed,  able  to 
get  control  over  the  riotous  multitudes.  In 
explaining  this  incident,  the  Minister  of 
Government  claimed  that,  on  February 
18th,  he  had  notified  the  pastor  of  this  and 
other  churches,  which  had  failed  to  apply 
for  a license  to  operate  places  of  public 
worship,  that,  unless  they  did  this  within 
three  days,  the  churches  conducted  by  them 
would  be  seized  by  the  Government  and  per- 
‘ manently  closed,  and  that  the  action  of  the 
police,  on  the  24th,  was  in  pursuance  of  this 
notice.  This  incident  gave  rise  to  numerous 
protests  which  the  Government  authorities 
treated  with  contempt. 

February  24th — 

President  Calles  issued  telegraphic  instruc- 
tions to  all  State  authorities,  calling  upon 
them  to  enforce  the  anti-religious  clauses  of 
the  Constitution,  threatening  to  dismiss 
summarily  from  the  public  service  any 
officer  who  failed  to  act  with  energy  at  once 
in  this  matter. 

February  24th — 

The  Minister  of  Government  sent  out  a warn- 
ing to  all  churches  in  Mexico  that  unless 
they  complied  at  once  with  the  rule  requiring 
that  they  be  specially  licensed  as  houses  of 
public  worship,  they  would  be  sununarily 
seized  and  closed  as  had  been  the  parish 
church  of  the  Holy  Family  in  Mexico  City. 


12 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


February  25th — 

Throughout  the  Republic,  parish  priests  are 
called  upon  to  show  their  license  for  opera- 
ting a house  of  public  worship  and,  in  case 
a license  does  not  exist,  the  church  is  sum- 
marily closed. 

In  many  places  this  action  results  in  violence 
and  some  deaths  occur  as  a consequence  of 
the  rioting. 

February  26th — 

Fortes  Gil,  Governor  of  Tamaulipas,  refused 
permission  to  open  a Protestant  church  at 
Tampico  on  the  grounds  that  the  minister 
was  not  Mexican  by  birth. 

February  26th — 

The  Orphan  Asylum  of  St.  Joseph  was  sup- 
pressed at  Colima.  Pious  families  offered 
the  hospitality  of  their  homes  to  the  little 
orphans  who  would  otherwise  have  re- 
mained without  shelter. 

February  26th — 

A private  boarding-school  for  girls  at  Colima 
was  closed  because  the  parents  refused  to 
send  their  girls  to  be  educated  under  a 
school  supervised  by  the  Government. 

February  26th — 

The  Bishop’s  residence,  at  Colima,  was  con- 
fiscated. 

February  26th — 

The  K.  of  C.  Hall,  at  Colima,  was  confiscated. 

February  26th — 

All  private  schools  and  convents  at  Tacam- 
baro,  in  the  State  of  Michoacan,  were  taken 
possession  of  by  Federal  troops. 

February  26th — 

Two  Catholic  and  two  Protestant  schools 
were  suppressed  at  Ciudad  Juarez. 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


13 


February  26th — 

The  Orphan  Asylum  of  the  Sacred  Heart  was 
closed  at  Ciudad  Juarez. 

February  28th — 

A party,  under  the  leadership  of  Adam 
Moreno,  attacked  the  parish  church  at  Tepic, 
in  the  State  of  Nayarit.  The  people  flew  to 
the  defense  of  their  church.  The  represen- 
tatives of  the  Federal  Government  and  the 
State  Police  Commissioner  were  both  severe- 
ly beaten  up  and  their  followers  driven  from 
the  church. 

February  28th — 

The  Secretary  of  State,  in  charge  of  matters 
pertaining  to  public  worship,  issued  a state- 
ment in  which  he  declared: 

^^The  Federal  Government  will  not  let  up  in  its 
determination  to  enforce  the  law  until  every 
minister  of  religion  regardless  of  his  creed 
and  without  distinction  has  complied.’’ 

The  Secretary  then  adds,  that  action  having 
now  been  taken  in  every  State  of  the  Re- 
public, ^Ve  have  heard  of  not  one  protest 
and  have  observed  no  evidence  of  disap- 
proval, which  clearly  demonstrates  that  our 
work  is  along  lines  demanded  by  the  people.” 

This  was  only  a few  days  after  the  receipt  of 
the  protest  of  the  Archbishop  and  800,000 
Catholics  of  Michoacan  and  is  an  impudent 
denial  of  the  right  of  Catholics  to  be  heard 
by  the  Government  of  Mexico. 

In  spite  of  the  boast  of  the  Minister,  not 
all  the  states,  which  compose  the  Mexican 
Union,  had,  on  this  date,  adopted  any  form 
of  enforcement  law  regulating  religious  wor- 
ship under  Article  130.  In  two  States, 
Guerrero  and  Chihuahua,  the  legislation  in- 
troduced was  defeated  and  in  other  States 
no  action  was  taken. 


14 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


February  28th — 

The  schools  of  Parral,  in  the  State  of  Chihua- 
hua, were  closed  and  no  provision  made  for 
the  education  of  the  children  who  had  at- 
tended them. 

February  28th — 

A Protestant  school,  known  as  Progress  Col- 
lege, was  closed  in  Chihuahua  by  the  police 
because  it  was  conducted  under  religious 
auspices. 

March  1st — 

The  Orphan  Asylum  of  St.  Joseph  was  closed 
by  the  police  at  Vera  Cruz,  and  the  sisters 
were  told  that  they  might  no  longer  remain 
in  Vera  Cruz  unless  they  ceased  wearing 
their  religious  habit. 

March  1st — 

The  Sisters  of  Charity  have,  up  to  the  present, 
commanded  the  respect  of  all  classes  in 
Mexico  and  have  not  been  molested  in  their 
work  of  charity.  At  Vera  Cruz,  however, 
the  authorities  advised  the  Sisters  of  Charity 
that  they  must  cease  wearing  the  religious 
habit. 

March  1st — 

The  municipal  authorities  at  Vera  Cruz  decided 
to  hold  as  an  accomplice  in  crime  any  one 
who,  residing  in  the  vicinity  of  any  school 
or  convent,  failed  to  notify  the  Government 
of  every  breach  of  the  Constitution  com- 
mitted in  the  same. 

March  1st — 

The  private  chapel  of  the  Sisters  of  Charity 
at  Vera  Cruz  was  ordered  closed. 

March  1st — 

The  Governor  of  the  State  of  Vera  Cruz,  in  a 
circular  to  the  municipal  authorities,  threat- 
ened with  summary  dismissal  and  criminal 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


16 


prosecution  all  who  failed  in  their  duty 
to  close  ^ ^convents,  seminaries,  schools, 
and  hospitals,^^  or  who  failed  to  expel  foreign 
sisters  or  priests. 

March  1st — 

In  the  town  of  Cordoba,  the  municipal  police 
seized  the  orphan  asylum  conducted  there 
by  the  Sisters  of  Charity.  The  sisters  and 
the  orphans  were  turned  into  the  street 
and  the  institution  closed. 

March  2nd — 

The  same  Adam  Moreno  and  Torres  Mal- 
donado, who  had,  a few  days  before,  been 
driven  out  of  the  Cathedral  Church  at 
Tepic  by  the  people,  at  the  head  of  a large 
number  of  followers,  attacked  the  parish 
church  at  Jalisco.  Again,  the  people  as- 
sembled to  defend  their  rights.  The  cor- 
respondent of  “EL  UNIVERSAL’’  reports 
that  there  were  some  wounded  in  the 
fighting  and  that  the  agent  of  the  Federal 
Government  lost  his  life.  Rafael  Sanchez 
Lira,  State  Commissioner,  instructed  the 
police  to  take  what  steps  might  be  necessary 
to  subdue  the  opposition  and  charged  them, 
especially,  to  place  under  arrest  any  priests 
whom  they  might  find  in  the  church.  The 
agents  of  the  Federal  Government  called 
for  reinforcements  and  it  is  said  that  sum- 
mary punishment  was  administered  to  those 
who  had  sought  to  defend  their  church. 
These  facts  were  all  reported  as  items  of 
current  news  in  “EL  UNIVERSAL.” 

March  3rd — 

Three  agents  of  the  Government  were  killed 
by  the  people  of  Nayarit  who  refused  to 
allow  their  churches  to  be  inventoried  and 
taken  over  by  the  Government. 


16 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


March  3rd — 

The  Governor  of  the  State  of  Potosi  signed 
and  published  a law  reducing  the  number  of 
priests  in  the  State  from  ninety-five  to 
twenty-five,  allowing  one  for  each  township, 
excepting  Matehuala  and  Santa  Maria, 
where  the  number  allowed  is  two,  and  the 
State  Capitol,  where  the  number  allowed  is 
ten. 

The  Catholics  at  once  protested  against  this 
law  on  the  ground  that  it  was  a violation  of 
the  Constitution  because  the  number  allowed 
was  not  in  accordance  with  the  religious 
needs  of  the  State. 

March  4th — 

At  Chihuahua,  the  Catholic  people  organized 
a public  parade  of  protest  against  the  anti- 
religious  conduct  of  the  Government.  The 
Governor  sent  the  police  to  break  up  the 
demonstration.  In  the  rioting  several  per- 
sons were  seriously  wounded. 

March  5th — 

The  State  Governor,  without  having  given  any 
notice  of  his  intention,  ordered  the  closing 
of  the  Theological  Seminary,  at  Oaxaca,  a 
school  conducted  in  the  same  city  by  the 
Knights  of  Columbus,  and  two  other  im- 
portant private  schools. 

A school  conducted  in  connection  with  the 
Protestant  church  in  the  same  place  was 
not  disturbed. 

When  the  people  protested  against  this  mani- 
fest partiality,  they  were  repressed  by  the 
police ; rioting  ensued,  and  troops  had  to  be 
employed  to  restore  order. 

March  5th — 

Protests  from  all  over  Mexico  began  to  flow 
into  the  Government.  One,  signed  by  four 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


17 


thousand  people  of  Merida,  Yucatan,  de- 
mands that  Congress  take  steps  at  once  to 
amend  the  Federal  Constitution. 

March  5th — 

The  Bishop  of  Colima,  in  a dignified  brief,  pro- 
tested against  the  reduction  of  the  number 
of  priests  in  his  diocese  from  sixty-five  to 
twenty. 

March  6th — 

The  Governor  of  Vera  Cruz  served  notice, 
through  the  Municipal  President,  on  the 
Bishop  of  Papantla  that,  hereafter,  there 
shall  be  only  one  Catholic  Bishop  in  the 
State  and  ordered  the  Bishop  of  Papantla  to 
cease  functioning  as  a Bishop  in  the  State. 

March  6th — 

The  Cathedral  Church  of  Holy  Cross  was 
closed  at  Papantla  by  order  of  the  Municipal 
President. 

March  9th — 

In  the  City  of  Zamora,  the  protests  of  the 
people  were  overruled  by  the  municipal 
authorities  and  the  private  schools  were 
closed. 

March  9th — 

The  K.  of  C.  Hall  at  Zamora  was  seized  by  the 
police  and  closed. 

March  9th — 

The  headquarters  of  the  Young  Men’s  Catholic 
Association  of  Mexico,  at  Zamora,  was 
closed. 

March  9th — 

The  residence  of  the  Catholic  Bishop,  at 
Zamora,  was  seized. 

March  9th — 

The  chapel  of  the  Servants  of  Mary”  was 
closed  at  Zamora. 


18 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


March  9th — 

In  spite  of  the  fact  that  there  are  25,000 
Catholics  at  Jalapa,  the  State  Capitol  of 
Vera  Cruz,  only  two  churches  were  allowed 
to  remain  open  for  public  worship  with  only 
three  priests  to  minister  in  them. 

March  9th — 

At  Rio  Verde,  in  the  State  of  Potosi,  some  four 
thousand  Catholics  marched  to  the  office  of 
the  Municipal  Government  and  filed  a per- 
sonal protest  against  the  persecution  of  re- 
ligion. The  President  refused  to  receive 
their  protest  and  called  out  the  military  to 
fire  on  the  petitioners. 

March  9th — 

J.  D.  Dale,  a Baptist  preacher,  was  arrested  at 
Tampico  for  having  exercised  his  ministry, 
being  a foreigner.  The  Rev.  Mr.  Dale  was 
ordered  deported. 

March  9th — 

The  State  Legislature  of  Tamaulipas  passed  a 
law  reducing  the  number  of  priests  from 
eighty-five  to  twelve.  There  are  600,000 
people  in  the  State  and  most  of  them  are 
Catholics. 

March  10th — 

The  Governor  of  the  State  of  Vera  Cruz  re- 
jected the  petition  of  the  people  of  Papantla 
demanding  that  the  State  Legislature  recon- 
sider the  law  suppressing  the  diocese  of 
Papantla  and  banishing  the  Bishop  on  the 
grounds  that  this  was  a matter  not  within 
his  jurisdiction. 

March  12th — 

The  Protestant  Institute  at  Saltillo  was  or- 
dered closed  because  it  was  conducted  by 
American  clergymen  for  whom  it  was  un- 
lawful to  engage  in  primary  educational 
work  in  Mexico. 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


19 


March  12th — 

Headquarters  of  a Catholic  Labor  Union  at 
Guadalajara  were  closed,  the  building  and 
furniture  was  confiscated. 

This  account  of  atrocities  could  be  extended,  but  enough 
has  been  said  to  give  the  reader  a fair  picture  of  conditions 
which  resulted  from  the  orders  issued  during  February  and 
March  of  the  present  year.  Every  incident  here  mentioned 
has  been  taken  from  the  secular  daily  press  of  Mexico 
City.  The  story  is  far  from  complete.  Information  from 
private  sources  shows  that  acts  of  violence  and  serious 
rioting  occurred  and  continue  to  occur  throughout  the 
eleven  States  in  which  the  anti-religious  laws  are  being 
enforced.  Officials  of  the  State  and  National  Governments 
have  refused  to  hear  the  protests  that  have  been  made  and, 
in  most  of  the  States  where  an  attempt  has  been  made  to 
enforce  these  laws,  a kind  of  deadlock  between  the  people 
and  the  Government  has  been  reached,  the  people  refusing 
to  obey  the  anti-religious  orders  pending  action  by  the 
Government  on  their  protests. 

The  record  which  we  have  presented,  and  which  spans 
only  thirty  days,  is  sufficient  to  prove  to  any  fair-minded 
man  that  the  present  Mexican  Government  is  persecuting 
the  Catholic  Church.  To  expose  the  fact  and  the  extent  of 
that  persecution  is  the  purpose  of  this  pamphlet.  Many 
Americans  have  asked,  are  asking  is  there  a persecution  of 
the  Church  in  Mexico?  Some  have  denied  it.  Official 
publications  of  certain  Protestant  denominations  have 
categorically  stated  that  the  Mexican  Government  is  not 
persecuting  the  Catholic  Church.  Some  Catholic  periodicals 
have  treated  the  Mexican  trouble  as  if  it  were  an  open 
question  as  to  whether  the  Church  is  being  persecuted  or 
not.  The  light  of  facts  will  clear  up  this  indecision  and  this 
ignorance. 

If  it  is  cited  in  opposition  that  the  economic  and  social 
welfare  of  the  Mexican  people  requires  that  religion  be 
persecuted;  that  the  Catholic  Church  in  particular  be  de- 
prived of  life  and  liberty,  we  can  but  say  that  such  a course 
has  never  proved  beneficial  to  any  people  or  to  any  nation. 
The  history  of  Mexico  contradicts  it  fiatly.  With  any 
economic  programme  built  upon  Christian  principles,  the 


20 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


Church  in  Mexico  is  in  full  sympathy.  The  sympathy  of  the 
Church  is  with  anyone  who  with  sincerity  of  purpose,  with 
honesty  and  with  justice,  espouses  the  cause  of  the  Mexican 
people  against  exploiters  who  would  barter  away  not  only 
the  national  resources  of  the  nation  but  even  the  labor  of 
its  people;  who  would  hold  those  people  in  slavery  and 
ignorance.  The  Church  would  just  as  strongly  condemn  and 
oppose  those  who,  under  pretence  of  reform,  would  under- 
take to  fetter  still  more  firmly  the  bonds  that  hold  its 
citizens  in  servitude  and  oppression. 

They  who  at  present  rule  Mexico  have  forfeited  any 
right  to  the  confidence  and  respect  of  the  people  both  by 
their  own  actions  and  by  the  history  of  the  movement  of 
which  they  are  a part. 


THE  ST.  LOUIS  JUNTA 

As  early  as  1906,  the  opposition  to  Porfirio  Diaz  was 
assuming  formidable  proportions.  The  syndicalist  move- 
ment which  made  such  headway  in  the  countries  of  South- 
western Europe  at  that  time  was  accompanied  by  a sym- 
pathetic movement  in  other  Latin  countries,  and  especially 
in  Mexico.  The  Diaz  Government  resorted  to  banishment 
and  deportation  in  self-defense.  Many  of  the  refugees  fled 
to  the  United  States  and  established  their  headquarters  in 
St.  Louis,  Missouri.  Sitting  there,  in  1906,  they  drafted  a 
manifesto,  declaring  themselves  to  be  the  champions  of  the 
cause  of  labor  in  Mexico,  and  to  be  the  unalterable  enemies 
of  the  Catholic  Church.  In  this  manifesto,  they  assume  the 
name  ^ ^Liberal  Party  of  Mexico’^  (Partido  Liberal  Mexi- 
cano).  The  platform  which  they  published  at  the  time 
sheds  much  light  on  the  acts  and  policies  of  the  present 
Government  of  Mexico.  We  quote  the  follow^ing  from  that 
platform: 

^ T 1 . Obligation  of  only  imparting  laical  instruction 
in  all  the  schools  of  the  Republic,  whether 
Government  or  private  schools,  establish- 
ing the  responsibilities  of  the  directors  of 
those  schools  who  may  not  comply  with 
this  precept. 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


21 


^^15.  To  prescribe  that  foreigners,  by  the  sole  fact 
of  acquiring  property,  lose  their  original 
nationality  and  become  Mexican  citizens. 

Nationalization,  in  accordance  with  the  law, 
of  all  property  which  the  clergy  has  in  the 
hands  of  other  people. 

^T9.  To  aggravate  the  penalties  of  the  reform  law 
for  violators  of  the  same. 

^^20.  Suppression  of  the  schools  under  the  clergy. 


THE  MADERO-MAGON 
REVOLUTION 

When  it  became  evident  that  Porfirio  Diaz  could  not 
maintain  himself  in  power  as  President  of  Mexico,  two 
factions  took  the  field,  both  of  which  sought  the  control 
of  Mexico.  Francisco  Madero  at  the  head  of  one  of  these 
factions,  was,  for  a while,  successful.  The  Magon  Brothers, 
working  from  the  United  States,  with  the  cooperation  of  the 
Industrial  Workers  of  the  World  and  a large  number  of 
Mexican  refugees  residing  in  the  United  States,  charged 
Madero  with  being  dominated  by  the  capitalistic  classes  and 
stirred  up  the  outlying  departments  against  his  Government. 


THE  PLATFORM  OF  1911 

The  purpose  of  the  Magon  Revolution  is  clearly  stated 
in  a manifesto  which  its  leaders  in  the  United  States  pub- 
lished on  April  3,  1911,  and  from  which  we  translate  the 
following  paragraphs : 

^‘The  Liberal  Party  of  Mexico  has  not  taken  up 
arms  for  the  purpose  of  overthrowing  the  Dictator 
Porfirio  Diaz  to  put  in  his  place  any  new  tyrant. 

The  Liberal  Party  of  Mexico  is  taking  part  in  the 
present  insurrection  with  the  deliberate  and  firm 


22 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


purpose  of  expropriating  the  land  and  the  imple- 
ments of  production  for  the  purpose  of  turning  these 
over  to  the  people,  that  is,  to  all  and  each  one  of  the 
inhabitants  of  Mexico.  We  consider  this  step 
essential  if  we  are  to  open  the  doors  for  the  effective 
emancipation  of  the  Mexican  people. 

^^Now,  there  has  likewise  entered  the  field  of 
conflict  another  party:  The  Anti-Reelectionist 
Party,  whose  Chief,  Francisco  I.  Madero,  is  a 
millionaire,  whose  fortune  has  fabulously  been 
increased  by  the  sweat  and  the  tears  of  the  peons  of 
his  estates.  This  party  is  fighting  to  make  ^effec- 
tive’ the  right  to  vote  and  thus  to  set  up  a bourgeois 
republic,  such  as  that  of  the  United  States. 

^^The  Dictatorship  of  Porfirio  Diaz  is  bound  to 
fall;  but  the  Revolution  will  not  end  with  this. 
Over  the  tomb  of  this  infamous  dictatorship  there 
will  stand,  face  to  face,  with  weapons  in  their 
hands,  the  two  social  classes;  those  who  have  and 
those  who  have  not,  pretending,  the  first  to  main- 
tain the  preponderance  of  its  interest,  and  the 
second  to  abolish  those  privileges  by  instituting  a 
system  which  will  guarantee  to  every  man  Bread, 
Land,  and  Liberty.” 


THE  MURDER  OF  MADERO 

Francisco  Madero  was  able,  for  a brief  period,  to 
assume  authority  in  the  City  of  Mexico.  He  was,  with 
difficulty,  able  to  extend  the  sphere  of  his  influence  to  the 
confines  even  of  the  valley  of  Mexico,  which  is  comprised 
in  the  Federal  District.  The  story  of  the  murder  of  Madero 
and  his  companions  shocked  the  civilized  world  because  of 
the  cowardice  and  treachery  with  which  it  was  accompanied. 


VICTORIAN O HUERTA 

Victoriano  Huerta,  after  the  fall  of  Madero,  held  the 
reins  of  office.  He  never  succeeded  in  effectively  placing 
himself  in  control  of  more  than  a small  portion  of  Mexico. 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


23 


On  February  18,  1913,  Huerta  sent  telegrams,  bidding 
for  the  support  of  the  State  Governors  and  revolutionary 
leaders.  Carranza,  then  Governor  of  the  State  of  Coahuila, 
replied  to  this  by  announcing  his  refusal  to  treat  with 
Huerta  and  calling  on  all  State  Governors  to  join  him. 
On  March  26th,  under  the  name  of  the  Plan  of  Guadalupe, 
Carranza  drew  up  his  platform  and  assumed  the  active 
leadership  of  armed  insurrection  against  Huerta. 

The  hostile  demonstrations  made  by  the  United  States 
forces  on  April  10,  1914,  at  Tampico,  and,  on  April  21st, 
at  Vera  Cruz,  were  rapidly  followed  by  the  downfall  of 
Huerta,  who  resigned  on  July  15th  of  that  year.  Thus, 
Carranza  was  able  to  make  American  intervention  his  rally- 
ing cry  for  union  among  the  insurgents.  Marching  upon 
Mexico  City,  Carranza  took  possession  of  the  Government 
upon  the  withdrawal  of  Carvajal.  Calling  a convention  of 
the  revolutionary  leaders  for  the  purpose  of  confirming 
himself  in  office,  Carranza  found  the  opposition  too  strong 
to  be  controlled  and,  denouncing  the  Military  Chieftains  in 
a decree,  he  removed  his  Government  from  Mexico  City, 
thus  abandoning  the  finest  part  of  Mexico  to  be  ravished 
by  contending  bands  of  insurgents. 


DECREE  OF  DECEMBER  12,  1914 

On  December  12,  1914,  Carranza  issued  a proclamation 
to  the  Mexican  nation.  He  disavowed  all  intention  to  make 
himself  President.  He  outlined  the  principles  of  reform 
for  which  he  proposed  to  continue  fighting  and,  denouncing 
those  who  refused  to  cooperate  with  him,  he  announced  a 
preconstitutional  period,  within  which  he  would  publish 
laws  providing  for  the  reforms  he  advocated  and,  at  the  end 
of  which,  he  would  convoke  a national  constituent  congress 
to  ratify  his  decrees,  reform  the  Constitution,  and  elect  a 
Chief  Executive. 

There  is  no  travesty  of  Government  that  we  recall 
equal  in  its  cynicism  to  that  of  Carranza,  who,  while  his 
country  was  being  tom  to  shreds  by  the  bands  of  marauders, 
withdrew  from  the  scene  of  conflict  and,  setting  up  his 


24 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


printing-press,  industriously  printed  his  decrees  and  laws  by 
authority  of  his  position  as  ^Tirst  Chief  of  the  Army  en- 
charged  with  executive  power/^ 

Desiring  to  win  the  sympathy  of  foreign  nations  and  to 
rally  under  his  banner  the  people  of  Mexico,  Carranza 
declared,  in  a letter  to  Eliseo  Arredondo,  his  agent  at 
Washington, to  whom  he  wrote,  on  February  3,  1915: 

^ ‘When  peace  has  been  restored  I shall  convoke 
a Congress,  duly  elected  from  among  the  citizens, 
which  shall  have  the  character  of  a Constituent 
Congress,  which  shall  have  for  its  purpose  the 
embodying  into  Constitutional  precepts  those 
Reforms  which  shall  have  been  dictated  during 
the  struggle.” 


CARRANZA  AND  THE  RADICALS 

In  March,  1915,  Carranza  entered  into  a formal  and 
solemn  alliance  with  the  radicals  who  had  assembled  in 
the  port  of  Vera  Cruz,  under  the  name  of  Casa  del  Obrero 
Mundial  (Home  of  the  Workers  of  the  World).  This 
organization  was  composed  largely  of  Mexican  refugees  who 
had  been  driven  out  of  the  United  States.  The  alliance 
between  Carranza  and  this  organization  w^as  a formal 
contract,  published  in  the  “Official  Gazette”,  of  wffiich 
Paragraph  6 is  as  follows: 

“The  workers  of  the  Casa  del  Obrero  Mundial 
shall  have  charge  and  conduct  an  active  campaign 
of  propaganda  for  the  purpose  of  winning  for  our 
cause  the  sympathy  of  all  the  laborers  of  the  Re- 
public, as  well  as  those  who  belong  to  the  Casa  del 
Obrero  Mundial,  demonstrating  to  all  Mexican 
laborers  the  advantages  which  they  will  gain  by 
joining  the  Revolution,  in  view  of  the  fact  that  the 
success  of  this  will  make  effective  for  the  laboring 
classes  the  improvements  in  their  conditions 
which  they  are  now*  seeking  through  their  organiza- 
tions.” 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


25 


The  treaty  allowed  the  labor  groups  in  the  Revolution 
to  assume  the  name  of  ^Teds^^  and  to  march  under  a red 
flag  and,  under  the  leadership  of  Obregon,  resulted  in  the 
domination  of  Carranza  and  his  Government  by  this  radical 
faction. 


CARRANZA  PROPOSES  PEACE 

On  June  11,  1915,  Carranza  made  an  appeal  to  the 
insurgents  and  to  the  people  of  Mexico  to  rally  to  his 
standard  and  assist  him  in  restoring  peace  and  order.  This 
appeal  is  interesting  as  it  sets  out  the  attitude  of  Carranza 
at  that  time  toward  religion  and  because  of  the  promises  it 
contains.  Paragraph  3 of  this  proclamation  is  translated 
as  follows : 

^^(3rd)  The  Constitutionalist  Laws  of  Mexico, 
commonly  called  the  laws  of  the  Reform, 
which  establish  the  separation  of  Church 
and  State  and  which  guarantee  to  the 
individual  the  right  to  worship  God  ac- 
cording to  the  dictates  of  his  own  con- 
science so  long  as  in  doing  so  he  does  not 
disturb  the  public  order,  shall  be  strictly 
observed;  therefore,  no  man  shall  suffer 
either  in  his  life,  his  liberty,  or  his  prop- 
erty by  reason  of  his  religious  belief.  The 
temples  shall  continue  to  be  property  of 
the  State,  in  accordance  with  laws  al- 
ready enacted;  and  the  Constitutionalist 
Government  shall  renew  the  authority  to 
use  for  purposes  of  worship  such  of  these 
as  may  be  found  necessary. 

Regardless  of  the  fact  that  he  had  no  territory  over 
which  he  held  undisputed  control,  Carranza  went  on 
legislating  and  published  his  decrees  in  the  ^'Constitu- 
cionalista.^^ 


26 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


MEXICO  DEVASTATED 

While  Carranza  was  thus  enacting  this  farce  of  exer- 
cising the  legislative  power  of  the  State,  by  virtue  of  his 
self-conferred  title  of  First  Chief  of  the  Army  encharged  with 
executive  power,  Mexico  was  abandoned  to  the  savage 
passions  of  the  revolutionary  hordes  who  swarmed  in  from 
the  mountains  and  valleys.  The  condition  of  Mexico,  as  a 
result  of  this  orgy  of  insurrection,  was  described  in  pathetic 
terms  by  eye-witnesses  to  a Committee  of  the  United  States 
Senate,  which  was  appointed  to  report  on  conditions  in 
Mexico  by  the  Sixty-sixth  Congress. 

Therein  is  given  full  and  detailed  description  of  how 
through  the  ruthlessness  of  Carranza  and  his  followers  the 
people  of  a great  republic  were  ravished,  their  culture  wiped 
out,  their  property  destroyed,  the  industries  ruined  and  their 
very  existence  as  a civilized  nation  placed  in  jeopardy. 
It  is  true  to  say  that  this  was  made  possible  by  the  policy 
of  inactivity  then  adopted  by  the  Government  of  the 
United  States. 


CONGRESS  OF  QUERETARO 

Encouraged  by  the  recognition  which  the  Government 
of  the  United  States  extended  to  him  in  October,  1915,  and 
by  the  success  of  his  army  under  the  red  flag,  Carranza 
convoked  an  election  of  Congress  on  September  14,  1916. 
In  this  proclamation,  Carranza  naively  remarks  that  his 
opponents  have  objected  to  his  decrees  and  that,  should 
he  proceed  to  set  up  a government  with  no  more  formality 
than  had  been  observed  in  issuing  the  decrees,  his  enemies 
would  at  once  bring  against  it  the  charge  that  it  did  not  have 
the  sanction  of  the  popular  will  ^ Vhich  is  sovereign”.  This 
proclamation  is  a colossal  hypocrisy  and  it  is  perfectly 
evident  that,  in  issuing  it,  Carranza  took  infinite  pains  to 
make  impossible  the  very  thing  which  he  pretended  to  favor, 
namely,  a free  and  full  expression  of  the  will  of  the  people 
of  Mexico  of  its  sentiments. 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


27 


Not  only  were  the  great  majority  of  voters  not  per- 
mitted to  vote,  but,  not  trusting  even  his  own  followers, 
Carranza,  in  the  law  under  which  this  election  was  held, 
prescribed  that  no  candidate  could  be  elected  who  was 
unable  to  prove  that  he  had  given  material  support  to  the 
Carranza  Revolution. 

It  cannot,  therefore,  in  any  sense,  be  said  that  the 
Constitution  thus  enacted  is  a supreme  law  freely  adopted 
and  approved  by  the  people  of  Mexico.  It  was  imposed  upon 
the  people  by  a chosen  band  of  revolutionists,  who  did  not 
have,  by  any  means,  control,  even  in  a military  way,  of  the 
Republic,  and  who  had  refused  to  fight  under  the  national 
flag  of  Mexico,  but  only  under  their  own  red  banner. 

This  Constitution  has  never  been  submitted  to  any 
form  of  ratification  by  the  people  of  Mexico.  Such  is  the 
law  to  which  Calles  and  his  defenders  appeal  when  they 
claim  they  cannot  accede  to  the  demands  of  our  State 
Department  for  justice  to  American  citizens. 


THE  CONSTITUTION  OF  1917 

Neither  the  purpose  of  this  pamphlet  nor  the  space  at 
our  disposal  permits  any  exhaustive  or  complete  analysis 
of  the  Constitution.  Space  is  not  available  even  for  the 
discussion  of  the  provisions  regarding  property,  land,  or 
labor. 

Our  present  purpose  is  to  discuss  only  those  features  of 
the  Constitution  which  concern  education  and  religion. 

The  spirit  in  which  the  Constitution  was  enacted  is 
apparent  from  the  first.  Article  I reads: 

^^Every  person  in  the  United  States  of  Mexico 
shall  enjoy  those  rights  which  are  granted  to  him 
by  this  Constitution.’^ 

No  thought  here  of  the  inalienable  rights  of  man!  How 
different  from  the  earlier  Mexican  Constitution — that  of 
1857 — which  in  its  first  article,  provided: 

^The  Mexican  people  recognize  that  the  rights 
of  man  are  the  basis  and  the  object  of  social 
institutions.” 


28 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


The  Republic  to  be  set  up  is  to  be  a republic. 

The  doctrine  of  separation  of  Church  and  State  no  longer 
satisfied  the  reformers  assembled  at  Queretaro.  The 
reforms  of  1856-74  of  Juarez  and  of  Lerdo  fell  far  short  of 
meeting  the  demands  of  1916.  Hereafter,  there  must  be 
more  than  a separation  between  Church  and  State;  the 
Church  must  be  denied  her  right  to  life  and  liberty. 


EDUCATION  UNDER  THE  CONSTITUTION 

Under  the  colony,  and  thereafter,  up  to  1856,  there 
existed  in  Mexico  an  official  association  of  Church  and 
State,  whereby  the  Church  was  placed  in  control  of  all 
education.  So  zealous  were  the  clergy  in  the  work  of  educa- 
tion that,  as  early  as  1570,  the  civil  authorities  of  the  colony 
complained  to  the  crown  that,  by  educating  them,  the  clergy 
were  ruining  the  Indians,  making  them  vain  and  insubor- 
dinate. The  Church  not  only  founded  universities  and 
professional  schools,  its  priests  carried  enlightenment  into 
every  parish  and  mission.  In  measuring  what  was  accom- 
plished, one  must  remember  that  public  free  education  for  all 
the  people  is  a very  modern  movement.  The  fact  remains 
and  cannot  be  disputed  that  the  intellectual  foundations  and 
traditions  of  Mexico  are  due  to  the  Catholic  Church. 

Education  and  civil  war  do  not  go  together.  Consider- 
ing the  history  of  Mexico,  from  1824  to  1856,  one  can  see 
that  the  development  and  extension  of  public  instruction  was 
impossible. 

In  1856,  the  whole  educational  and  charitable  edifice 
which  the  Church,  under  handicap  of  revolution,  of  political 
interference,  of  racial  divergencies  and  antagonisms,  had 
constructed,  was  swept  aside,  destroyed,  and  nothing  was 
put  in  its  place. 

In  that  year,  the  Government  of  Mexico  seized  the 
Church  and  stripped  her — stripped  her  till  she  became 
legally  a pauper  and  powerless.  The  then  Government  of 
Mexico  took  over  all  her  possessions — schools,  landed 
property,  endowments,  charitable  institutions — everything. 
The  Government  robbed  the  Church  of  the  means  to 
promote  education;  and,  by  constitutional  law,  prohibited 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


29 


the  Church  from  teaching  or  promoting  education.  For  the 
past  seventy  years — for  a period  of  over  two  generations — 
the  Government  of  Mexico  has  been  responsible  for  educa- 
tion in  Mexico.  What  is  its  record? 

We  quote  from  C.  E.  Castaneda,  a Mexican,  by  birth, 
who  wrote  in  the  Educational  Review  for  October,  1924: 

^ ^Compulsory  education  has  been  in  force  in 
Mexico  for  more  than  fifty  years  but  schools  have 
not  been  maintained  except  in  the  larger  cities  and 
in  a few  towns.  Thus  the  rural  sections  have  never 
enjoyed  the  blessings  of  a public  school  system. 

Out  of  16,000,000  of  inhabitants,  less  than  20  per 
cent  are  able  to  read  and  write,  while  thousands 
of  native  Indians  are  unable  to  speak  Spanish  to 
this  day.’’ 

If  the  people  of  Mexico  and  the  Mexican  Government 
are  now  determined  to  extend  the  benefits  of  public  instruc- 
tion, no  one  will  rejoice  more  thereat  than  the  Catholics 
of  the  country.  In  that  work,  the  Mexican  people  will  have 
the  good  wishes  of  our  own  and  of  every  nation. 

But  the  Mexican  Government  will  not  receive  the 
support  of  men  or  of  nations  that  love  justice  if  she 
persists  in  denying  the  fundamental  right  of  the  parent 
to  care  for  the  religious  education  of  his  child;  if  it  drives 
God  out  of  all  schools;  if  it  makes  of  public  education  a 
political  and  governmental  tyranny. 

Our  American  Government  stands  upon  two  principles. 
The  first  is  respect  for  and  defense  of  the  inalienable  rights 
of  the  human  individual,  which  majority  rule  may  never 
violate,  but  must  always  support.  One  of  those  rights  is 
the  right  of  conscience;  of  religious  liberty. 

The  second  principle  is  like  unto  this  first — freedom  of 
spiritual,  moral,  and  intellectual  development,  which,  in  a 
word,  is  freedom  of  education. 

We  believe  that  of  this  individual  freedom  is  born 
responsibility,  and,  in  our  common  corporate  expression  of 
it  and  its  consequences,  America  has  made  and  is  to  continue 
her  life  for  the  general  welfare  of  all  her  citizens. 

To  know  that  the  Government  of  Mexico  is  absolutely 
denying  these  principles  to-day,  and  advocating  a political 
doctrine  with  which  no  American  can  agree,  it  is  sufficient 
to  read  the  present  Constitution  of  that  country. 


30 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


That  Constitution  prohibits  a minister  of  religion  from 
teaching  in  any  primary  school,  whether  the  school  be  public 
or  private.  Article  3 reads:  ^^No  religious  corporation  nor 
minister  of  any  religious  creed  shall  establish  or  direct 
schools  of  primary  instruction.^^ 

Any  school  erected  for  the  teaching  of  religion  shall 
ipso  facto  become  the  property  of  the  Federal  Government 
and  in  all  matters,  curriculum,  teachers,  etc.,  shall  be  under 
the  direction  of  said  Federal  Government.  (Cfr.  Article  130) 
No  minister  of  religion  nor  a religious  corporation  is 
allowed  to  initiate  or  maintain  any  institution  for  scientific 
research.  (Article  130). 

How  shall  we  reconcile  these  facts  with  the  first  clause 
of  Article  3 of  the  Constitution,  which,  copying  the  law 
of  1857,  declares  that  education  in  Mexico  shall  be  free? 

The  insurgent  band  at  Queretaro,  having  no  hope  of 
being  able  to  mould  these  communities  of  devoted  men  and 
women  to  their  materialistic  program,  decided  upon  the 
destruction  of  all  religious  orders. 

Article  5,  of  the  Constitution,  provides: 

^The  States  shall  not  permit  any  contract,  cove- 
nant, or  agreement  to  be  carried  out,  having  for  its 
object  the  abridgment,  loss,  or  irrevocable  sacri- 
fice of  the  liberties  of  man,  whether  by  reason  of 
labor,  education,  or  religious  vows.  The  law, 
therefore,  does  not  permit  the  establishment 
of  monastic  orders,  of  whatever  denomination,  or 
for  whatever  purpose  contemplated.'' 

Young  men  and  women  desiring  to  enter  even  the 
secular  ministry  of  religion  are,  under  this  provision,  to  do 
so  at  the  risk  of  having  incurred  an  irremovable  impediment 
against  their  entering  any  other  field  of  learning  should  they 
discover  any  incompatability  in  the  ministry  to  which  they 
sought  to  devote  themselves. 

^ ‘Under  no  conditions  shall  studies  carried  on  in 
institutions  devoted  to  the  professional  training  of 
ministers  of  religious  creeds  be  given  credit  or 
granted  any  other  dispensation  of  privilege  which 
shall  have  for  its  purpose  the  accrediting  of  the 
said  studies  in  oflScial  institutions.  Any  authority 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


31 


violating  this  provision  shall  be  punished  crimin- 
ally, and  all  such  dispensation  of  privilege  be  null 
and  void,  and  shall  invalidate  wholly  and  entirely 
the  professional  degree  toward  the  obtaining  of 
which  the  infraction  of  this  provision  may  in  any 
way  have  contributed.’’ 

Not  only  is  the  Church  prohibited  from  engaging  in 
any  organized  work  of  education — not  only  the  ministers  of 
religion  and  the  Church — but  laymen  may  not  even  engage 
in  the  open  discussion  in  the  press  of  topics  of  every  day 
interest.  The  same  Article  130  provides: 

^^No  periodical  publication  which  either  by 
reason  of  its  program,  its  title  or  merely  by  its 
general  tendencies,  is  of  a religious  character,  shall 
comment  upon  any  political  affairs  of  the  nation, 
nor  publish  any  information  regarding  the  acts  of 
the  authorities  of  the  country  or  of  private  indi- 
viduals, in  so  far  as  the  latter  have  to  do  with 
public  affairs.” 

Thus,  the  framers  of  the  Queretaro  Constitution  sought 
to  drive  the  Church  from  a field  of  social  action  in  which 
the  Catholic  Church  has  rendered  services  of  incalculable 
value  to  human  society  in  all  ages  since  her  foundation  and 
under  all  flags  where  she  has  been  organized. 


LEGAL  STATUS  OF  THE  CHURCH 

If  we  now  turn  to  a consideration  of  the  legal  condition 
and  status  of  the  Church  in  Mexico,  we  find  an  intolerable 
state  of  affairs.  Indeed,  no  one  can  question  the  justice 
with  which  the  Catholic  Bishops  of  Mexico  cry  out  in  their 
joint  pastoral,  of  April  21,  1926,  ^^Non  passumus” — ^we 
cannot ! These  Bishops  do  not,  however,  surrender.  With  a 
faith  in  God  and  a confidence  in  man  which  is  admirable, 
they  set  about  the  work  of  exposing  the  errors  into  which 
the  Mexican  nation  is  being  seduced. 

That  Constitution  does  not  permit  any  church  to  hold 
any  property  of  any  kind.  Section  2 of  Article  27  reads: 


32 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


religious  institutions  known  as  churches, 
irrespective  of  creed,  shall  in  no  case  have  legal 
capacity  to  acquire,  hold,  or  administer  real  prop- 
erty or  loans  made  on  such  real  property;  all  such 
real  property  or  loans  as  may  be  at  present  held 
by  the  said  religious  institutions,  either  on  their 
own  behalf  or  through  third  parties,  shall  vest  in 
the  Nation,  and  anyone  shall  have  the  right  to 
denounce  property  so  held.  Presumptive  proof  shall 
be  sufficient  to  declare  the  denunciation  well- 
founded.  Places  of  public  worship  are  the  prop- 
erty of  the  nation,  as  represented  by  the  Federal 
Government,  which  shall  determine  which  of  them 
may  continue  to  be  devoted  to  their  present  pur- 
poses. Episcopal  residences,  rectories,  seminaries, 
orphan  asylums  or  collegiate  establishments  of 
religious  institutions,  convents  or  any  other  build- 
ings built  or  designed  for  the  administration, 
propaganda  or  teaching  of  the  tenets  of  any  re- 
ligious creed  shall  forthwith  vest,  as  of  full  right, 
directly  in  the  Nation,  to  be  used  exclusively  for  the 
public  services  of  the  Federation  or  of  the  States, 
within  their  respective  jurisdictions.  All  places  of 
public  worship  which  shall  later  be  erected  shall 
be  the  property  of  the  Nation. 


That  Constitution  denies  legal  recognition  to  any 
church  or  religious  body  of  any  kind.  Article  130  reads: 
^^The  law  recognizes  no  juridical  personality  in  the  religious 
institutions  known  as  churches. 


THE  STATUS  OF  THE  CLERGY 

That  Constitution  does  not  recognize  a minister  of 
religion  as  one  having  charge  of  the  church  or  of  the  conduct 
of  a religious  service.  Such  charge  is  given  to  a janitor 
under  whom  will  serve  a committee  of  ten  citizens.  Article 
130  reads: 

^^Every  place  of  worship  shall  have  a person 
charged  with  its  care  and  maintenance,  who  shall  be 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


33 


legally  responsible  for  the  faithful  performance  of 
the  laws  on  religious  observances  within  the  said 
place  of  worship,  and  for  all  the  objects  used  for 
purposes  of  worship.  The  caretaker  of  each  place 
of  public  worship,  together  with  ten  citizens  of  the 
place,  shall  promptly  advise  the  municipal  authori- 
ties as  to  the  person  charged  with  the  care  of  the 
said  place  of  worship.’^ 

That  Constitution  prohibits  a minister  of  religion  from 
criticizing  any  fundamental  law  of  the  country.  All  the 
clergymen  of  the  United  States  who  have  dared  criticize 
the  Eighteenth  Amendment  would  have  been  liable  to  a 
jail  sentence  if  they  lived  in  Mexico  and  Mexico  had  our 
Eighteenth  Amendment.  Article  130  reads: 

^‘No  ministers  of  religious  creeds  shall,either 
in  public  or  private  meetings,  or  in  acts  of  worship 
or  religious  propaganda,  criticize  the  fundamental 
laws  of  the  country,  the  authorities  in  particular 
or  the  Government  in  general.’’ 

That  Constitution  prohibits  any  foreign-born  person 
from  being  a minister  in  Mexico.  Article  130  reads: 

^^Only  a Mexican  by  birth  may  be  a minister  of 
any  religious  creed  in  Mexico.” 

That  Constitution  aims  to  make  religion  and  the 
religious  ministry  an  odious  thing:  a thing  to  be  looked 
down  upon,  mistrusted,  even  despised  by  the  people.  It 
robs  a minister  of  his  political  manhood;  of  his  rights  as  a 
free  man,  it  makes  of  him  a suspect  and  an  unworthy. 

Article  130  reads: 

‘^Ministers  of  religious  creeds  . . . shall 

have  no  vote,  nor  be  eligible  to  office.” 

A minster  is  excluded  by  that  Constitution  from  being 
elected  a representative  to  Congress  or  to  the  nation’s 
Senate;  and  ipso  facto  he  is  ineligible  for  the  Presidency. 

Article  55  reads: 

“They  (representatives)  shall  not  be  ministers 
of  any  religious  creed.” 


34 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


Article  59  reads: 

‘'The  qualifications  necessary  to  be  a senator 
shall  be  the  same  as  those  necessary  to  be  a rep- 
resentative, excepting  that  of  age 

Article  82  reads: 

“He  (the  President)  shall  not  belong  to  the 
ecclesiastical  state  nor  be  a minister  of  any  re- 
ligious creed/’ 

That  Constitution  prohibits  any  minister  of  the  gospel 
from  inheriting  any  property  of  any  kind  from  any  indi- 
vidual, either  for  himself  or  as  a trustee,  unless  the  individual 
giving  the  bequest  is  related  by  blood  to  him  within  the 
fourth  degree.  Article  130  reads: 

“No  minister  of  any  religious  creed  may 
inherit,  either  on  his  own  behalf  or  by  means  of  a 
trustee  or  otherwise,  any  real  property  occupied  by 
any  association  of  religious  propaganda  or  re- 
ligious or  charitable  purposes.  Ministers  of  religious 
creeds  are  incapable  legally  of  inheriting  by  will 
from  ministers  of  the  same  religious  creed  or  from 
any  private  individual  to  whom  they  are  not 
related  by  blood  within  the  fourth  degree.” 

No  trial  by  jury  is  allowed  for  the  minister  of  the  gospel 
who  offends  any  of  these  anti-religious  provisions  of  the 
Constitution.  Article  130  reads: 

“No  trial  by  jury  shall  ever  be  granted  for  the 
infraction  of  any  of  the  preceding  provisions.” 

No  religious  orders,  such  as  characterize  in  our  country 
the  Catholic  Church,  or  the  Episcopalian,  or  the  Methodist, 
or  the  Salvation  Army,  are  allowed  under  that  Constitution ; 
nor  are  organizations  such  as  St.  Vincent’s  Hospital,  or 
St.  Luke’s  Hospital,  or  the  Presbyterian  Hospital,  allowed 
to  hold  property,  to  function.  Article  5 reads: 

“The  law,  therefore,  does  not  permit  the 
establishment  of  monastic  orders,  of  whatever 
denomination,  or  for  whatever  purpose  contem- 
plated.” 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


35 


Article  27,  Part  III,  reads: 

^Tublic  and  private  charitable  institutions  for 
the  sick  and  needy,  for  scientific  research,  or  for  the  i 
diffusion  of  knowledge,  mutual  aid  societies  or 
organizations  formed  for  any  other  lawful  purpose 
shall  in  no  case  acquire,  hold,  or  administer  loans 
made  on  real  property,  unless  the  mortgage  terms 
do  not  exceed  ten  years.  In  no  case  shall  institu- 
tions of  this  character  be  under  the  patronage, 
direction,  administration,  charge  or  supervision 
of  religious  corporations  or  institutions,  nor  of 
ministers  of  any  religious  creed  or  of  their  de- 
pendents, even  though  either  the  former  or  the 
latter  shall  not  be  in  active  service. 


FREEDOM  OF  WORSHIP 

Article  24  of  the  Constitution  of  1857  provided  for  the 
right  of  aU  Mexicans  never  to  be  twice  placed  in  jeopardy 
for  the  same  offense.  It  is  a strange  and  interesting  coin- 
cidence that  the  statement  of  this  right  is  wholly  eliminated 
from  the  Constitution  of  1917  and  in  its  place  the  following 
is  substituted: 

‘^Art.  24.  Everyone  is  free  to  embrace  the 
religion  of  his  choice  and  to  practice  all  ceremonies, 
devotions,  or  observances  of  his  respective  creed, 
either  in  places  of  public  worship  or  at  home,  pro- 
vided they  do  not  constitute  an  offense  punishable 
by  law. 

^^Every  religious  act  of  public  worship  shall  be 
performed  strictly  within  the  places  of  public  wor- 
ship, which  shall  be  at  all  times  under  govern- 
mental supervision.^^ 

The  conditions  under  which  religious  services  shall  be 
held,  by  whom  they  shall  be  held,  the  arbitrary  directions  as 
to  all  these  details  are  immediately  under  the  Federal 
Government  of  Mexico;  all  other  oflScials  are  only  auxiliaries 
in  these  matters  to  the  F ederal  authorities . Article  130  reads : 

“The  Federal  authorities  shall  have  power  to 
exercise  in  matters  of  religious  worship  and  out- 


36 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


ward  ecclesiastical  forms  such  intervention  as  by 
law  authorized.  All  other  officials  shall  act  as 
auxiliaries  to  the  Federal  authorities.^^ 

The  Constitution  provides  that  only  such  ministers 
shall  officiate  as  have  been  so  designated  by  the  legislature 
of  the  particular  State,  and  no  foreign-born  may  minister. 
Article  130  reads: 

^‘The  State  legislatures  shall  have  the  exclusive 
power  of  determining  the  maximum  number  of 
ministers  of  religious  creeds,  according  to  the  needs 
of  each  locality.  Only  a Mexican  by  birth  may  be 
a minister  of  any  religious  creed  in  Mexico.” 

To  know  these  provisions  of  the  present  Mexican 
Constitution  is  to  know  that  they  are  absolutely  irrecon- 
cilable with  justice  and  the  rights  of  man.  They  tell  plainly 
a warfare  against  religion — a deliberate  endeavor  to  destroy 
its  growth;  to  pull  out  its  roots.  We  cannot  accept  it.  Our 
whole  national  life  has  been  a protest  against  such  iniquity. 
It  is  abhorrent  to  every  human  instinct  of  fair  play. 


PERSECUTION  IN  MEXICO 

The  Constitution  of  1917  did  not  go  into  effect  at  once 
after  its  promulgation.  No  effort  was  made,  however,  to 
secure  for  it  the  formal  ratification  of  a popular  vote, 
nor  was  it  submitted  to  the  States  which  compose  the 
Mexican  Union,  for  their  action.  To  put  it  into  effect, 
enforcement  laws  were  necessary.  Carranza,  burdened  wdth 
protests  from  foreign  as  well  as  from  Mexican  sources, 
hesitated  and  did  not  enforce  in  full  the  Constitution. 

Under  Obregon,  the  ^Teformers”  became  more  insistent. 
Obregon  is  a practical  man  in  spite  of  his  profession  of 
sociaUsm.  In  reply  to  the  insistence  of  his  more  ardent 
followers,  an  official  bulletin  of  the  Federal  Department  of 
Education,  which  had  only  recently  been  created  by  the 
Congress,  published,  in  1921,  an  article  from  which  the 
following  is  taken : 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


37 


“Our  lyric  socialists  and  our  theorizing  syn- 
dicalists, along  with  a whole  tribe  of  politico-social 
leaders,  who  live  at  the  expense  of  the  workmen, 
paint  for  us  the  present  Russian  regime  as  the  ideal 
of  all  human  aspirations.  Doubtless,  many  of  the 
ideas  reduced  to  practice  in  Russia  should  be 
accepted  by  us  who  are  engaged  in  establishing  the 
rule  of  social  justice,  but  to  demand  that  we  set  up 
here  abruptly  systems  and  procedures  which  are 
foreign  to  our  character,  to  our  education,  and  to  our 
social  standards,  is  too  unpractical  to  be  accepted 
by  those  who  would  liberate  Mexico. 

Under  Calles,  all  prudence  seems  to  have  been  aban- 
doned. Scarcely  had  he  organized  his  Government  when  he 
set  about  the  work  of  destroying  the  Church. 

On  February  22, 1926,  his  Minister  of  Public  Instruction 
issued  a decree  calling  upon  all  private  educational  institu- 
tions to  comply  with  the  Constitution  or  close  their  doors. 

Two  days  later,  President  Calles,  himself,  sent  tele- 
graphic instructions  to  all  State  Governors  calling  upon  them 
to  regulate  and  enforce  the  Constitution  regarding  churches 
and  clergymen. 

A chorus  of  alarm  and  protest  rose  from  every  corner  of 
the  Republic. 

The  superioresses  of  thirty-six  communities  of  nuns 
engaged  in  educational  and  benevolent  services  in  Mexico, 
addressing  the  Archbishop  of  Mexico,  on  March  19,  1926, 
declared : 

“Our  consciences  cry  out  in  alarm.  We  feel 
that,  under  the  pretext  of  prudence,  we  are  being  led 
to  the  brink  of  an  awful  abyss,  at  the  foot  of  which 
misery  and  even  degradation  await  us.  We  have 
pretended  that  in  our  schools  only  lay  instruction  is 
imparted.  We  have  erased  the  names  of  our  insti- 
tutions because  they  may  not  contain  any  evidence 
of  religion.  We  have  removed  the  sacred  images 
from  our  parlors  and  reception  rooms.  We  have 
transformed  our  chapels  into  social  halls  and,  what 
is  even  worse,  we  have  taught  the  pupils  to  conceal 
the  fact  that  they  are  being  taught  religion,  that 


38 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


they  recite  a brief  prayer  at  the  opening  of  class. 

We  have  forbidden  them  to  have  a Cathecism  of 
Christian  Doctrine  or  any  other  symbol  of  religion 
among  their  school  equipment.  We  have,  in  short, 
taught  our  pupils  to  deny  the  truth  and,  if  we  go 
further,  we  will  tear  out  by  the  roots  from  their 
tender  hearts  their  Christian  Faith  and  manhood. 

are  prepared  with  all  our  sisters  to  under- 
take the  hardships  of  an  effective  and  open  fight. 

We  long  for  the  opportunity  to  sacrifice  everything, 
even  our  very  lives  if  that  be  necessary,  to  accom- 
plish the  amendment  of  those  Articles  of  the  Con- 
stitution which  oppress  and  enslave  our  Holy 
Mother,  the  Church,  and  her  Ministers,  whether 
national  or  foreign,  who,  with  untiring  zeal  and 
self-denial,  are  laboring  for  the  salvation  of  souls 
in  our  country. 

are  ready  to  obey  in  all  things.  But,  if 
you  will  permit  us,  we  will  refuse  in  every  school 
we  have  in  the  Republic  to  accept  the  infernal  rules 
which  it  is  sought  to  impose  on  Catholic  institu- 
tions.^^ 

Mothers  in  all  parts  of  the  Republic  demanded  that 
their  rights  to  educate  their  children  be  respected.  The 
principals  and  teachers  of  a hundred  and  fifty  schools  in  the 
vicinity  of  Mexico  City,  alone,  demanded  that  the  regula- 
tions be  not  enforced.  The  Bishop  of  Huejutla  but  voiced 
the  opinion  of  his  people  and  of  all  the  Catholics  of  Mexico 
when  he  denounced  the  infamous  regulations. 

denounce,  cried  Bishop  Manrique  in  in- 
dignation, “I  condemn  and  I abhor  each  and  every 
crime  which  the  Government  of  Mexico  has,  dur- 
ing my  days,  committed  against  the  Church,  es- 
pecially and  above  all,  its  ill-disguised  purpose  to 
root  up  and  destroy  once  and  for  all  time  the 
Catholic  Church  in  Mexico. 

'T  denounce  not  only  Articles  3,  5,  27  and  130, 
of  the  so-called  Constitution  of  Queretaro,  but  I 
denounce  each  and  every  law,  each  and  every 
precept,  issued  in  violation  of  the  law  of  God,  the 
rights  of  man,  or  the  teachings  of  Holy  Church.  It 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


39 


means  nothing  to  me  that  a law  be  fundamental, 
organic,  whatever  its  category,  be  it  of  today, 
yesterday,  or  tomorrow,  if  it  is  a violation  of  those 
sacred  rights.  With  regard  to  those  measures 
which  are  a violation  of  the  dignity  of  man,  as  are 
many  of  those  which,  in  its  madness  and  diabolical 
fury  against  the  Catholic  Church,  the  Government 
is  taking;  I denounce  them  all  with  indignation — 
not  as  a pastor  of  the  Church  of  Jesus  Christ,  but 
as  a citizen  who  knows  and  values  the  rights  and 
the  dignity  of  a free  man. 

^^The  Government  declares  that  the  Mexican 
people,  especially  the  lowly,  approve  of  their  acts 
and  demand  that  the  laws  be  enforced.  I defy  the 
Government  to  go  before  the  people,  to  give  the 
people  a fair  chance  to  vote  on  their  proposition, 
so  that  they,  and  the  whole  world  with  them,  may 
once  and  for  all  know  how  the  people  of  Mexico  feel 
on  these  matters.’’ 

The  Association  of  Catholic  Alumnae,  counting  among 
its  members  the  most  distinguished  women  of  Mexico, 
demanded,  in  a dignified  petition,  presented  by  them  to 
President  Calles,  on  April  25,  1926,  the  right  to  give  their 
sons  and  daughters  a Christian  education.  They  pointed 
out  that  laws  which  are  nothing  but  the  exalted  ideas  of 
revolution,  cannot  demand  the  respect  of  the  people. 

The  National  League  for  the  Defense  of  Religious 
Liberty,  a federation  of  Catholic  men  and  women  whose 
membership  reaches  a total  of  several  millions,  circulated 
among  its  members  a petition  calling  upon  the  Federal 
Congress  to  amend  the  anti-religious  Articles  of  the  Con- 
stitution. This  petition,  signed  by  hundreds  of  thousands 
of  Mexican  men  and  women,  w^as  printed  during  April,  1926: 

^The  Constitution,”  they  declare,  ^^makes 
provision  for  its  own  amendment.  In  seeking  its 
amendment  publicly,  as  we  do,  we  are  only  exer- 
cising a right  which  the  Constitution  itself  guar- 
antees to  us.” 

On  February  25th,  the  Young  Men’s  Catholic  Associa- 
tion, in  a published  statement,  declared: 


40 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


the  name  of  justice  and  fair  play,  we 
protest  that  a law  which  denies  the  natural  rights 
of  man  is  no  law  at  all.  A law  which  is  received 
with  indignation  by  a whole  nation  should  be 
reconsidered.'^ 

Bishop  Lara  of  the  Diocese  of  Tacambaro,  in  a dignified 
and  firm  protest,  demanded  that  President  Calles  and  the 
Federal  Congress  respect  the  rights  of  the  Catholic  people 
of  Mexico. 

^^Too  long,"  declares  the  Bishop  of  Tacambaro, 

^ Ve  have  remained  silent.  We  trusted  your  word, 

Mr.  President,  when  you  declared  you  were 
undertaking  the  regeneration  of  our  country  and 
asked  for  our  aid  and  forbearance.  We  hoped  that 
you  were  sincere  when  you  assured  us  your  only 
purpose  was  to  lead  the  country  to  that  high  ideal 
which  we  all  cherish. 

^Tn  1917,  we  solemnly  protested  against  the 
anti-religious  clauses  of  the  new  Constitution.  We, 
today,  as  then,  stand  ready  to  lay  down  our  lives 
in  defense  of  that  protest.  If  we  have  not  openly 
opposed  the  government,  it  has  been  because  dis- 
cretion has  been  exercised  in  enforcing  those  pro- 
visions." 

The  Courts  of  Justice,  as  well  as  the  legislative  and 
executive  authorities.  State  and  Federal,  have  been  appealed 
to  by  the  Catholics  of  Mexico.  Every  means  available  to 
law-abiding  people  have  been  resorted  to.  The  result  has 
been  but  to  intensify  the  fury  of  the  Government,  and 
bring  down  upon  the  heads  of  the  Catholics  a persecution 
against  which  no  Catholic  and  no  Catholic  institution  is 
secure. 

The  pen  revolts  against  setting  down,  in  full  detail 
the  savage  cruelty  and  ruthlessness,  the  crimes  and  abuses 
which,  in  the  nameof  the  law,  are  being  committed  in  Mexico. 
In  this  brief  document,  we  can  hope  only  to  mention  a 
few  incidents  which  have  reached  the  public  through  the 
secular  press. 

Beginning  with  the  ^Tre-Constitutional  Period,"  under 
Carranza,  and  without  interruption  since  then,  the  Church 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


41 


in  Mexico  has  been  subjected  to  a program  of  confiscation  and 
suppression.  All  property,  buildings,  and  equipment,  the 
residences  of  bishops  and  priests,  benevolent  institutions, 
homes  for  the  aged,  hospitals,  orphanages,  asylums,  the 
institutions  of  associations  of  Catholic  laymen  and  women 
engaged  in  benevolent  and  welfare  work,  educational 
institutions,  even  ecclesiastical  seminaries,  all  have  been 
seized  and  converted  to  other  uses,  or,  if  they  have  been 
allowed  to  remain  in  the  service  for  which  they  have  been 
dedicated,  it  has  been  only  by  the  tolerance  of  some  govern- 
ment agent,  which  at  any  time  may  be  revoked. 

Those  religious  communities  which  were  not  suppressed 
outright  were  obliged  to  abstain  from  the  benevolent  and 
educational  services  to  which  they  were  devoted;  their 
members  could  not  wear  their  habit  in  public,  and  they  were 
at  all  times  subject  to  the  abuses  and  even  violence  of 
fanatical  officials. 

Since  the  publication  of  the  decrees  of  February  22nd 
and  24th,  1926,  the  persecution  has  been  aimed  chiefly  at 
the  clergy  and  the  schools. 


PERSECUTION  OF  THE  CLERGY 

Article  130  of  the  Constitution  declares  that  the 
ministers  of  religion  shall  be  subject  to  the  laws  and 
regulations  concerning  all  professions  and  gives  to  the  State 
legislatures  ^ ^exclusive  power  of  determining  the  maxi- 
mum number  of  ministers  according  to  the  needs  of  each 
locality.” 

When  President  Calles  decided  to  enter  upon  his  pro- 
gram of  drastic  suppression  with  regard  to  the  clergy  and  the 
churches  and  the  schools,  he  foresaw  that  he  would  not 
have  the  support  of  public  opinion  either  in  Mexico  or  in 
foreign  countries. 

Conscious  of  the  difficulty  he  might  encounter  if  foreign 
clergymen  were  made  to  suffer  injustice,  Calles,  to  avoid 
complications,  decided  upon  the  summary  expulsion  of  all 
foreign  priests. 

By  concerted  action,  the  homes  of  foreign  priests  were 
raided  late  in  the  evening  of  February  10th.  Like  criminals, 


42 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


they  were  seized.  Time  was  not  allowed  for  even  the 
elementary  preparations  for  travel.  Some  of  the  priests 
testified  they  were  not  given  time  to  clothe  themselves  or 
even  ^^to  seize  a hat.^^  They  were  brutally  hustled  from  their 
homes,  herded  into  a train  that  was  waiting,  shipped  to  the 
coast  and  put  aboard  the  first  ship  available.  When  inter- 
viewed by  representatives  of  the  press,  the  Minister  of 
Police  refused  to  give  any  information.  The  State  Govern- 
ments followed  the  lead  of  the  Federal  authorities  and, 
within  a few  days,  the  foreign  priests  had  either  been 
deported  or,  under  pressure,  had  consented  to  leave. 


THE  RIGHT  TO  PETITION  DENIED 

(Fearing  the  reaction  of  public  opinion,  the  Attorney- 
General  issued  instructions  to  the  agents  of  the  Govern- 
ment throughout  the  Republic,  ordering  them  to  arrest 
^^any  Catholic  who  may  circulate  or  sign  a protest. In 
some  of  the  States,  the  Catholics  adopted  the  practice  of 
hanging  mourning  on  their  front  doors  as  a symbol  of  their 
protest  against  the  persecution.  This  was  prohibited  and 
many  were  arrested  on  charges  of  sedition  because  they  had, 
even  in  this  mute  fashion,  protested.  A few  days  later,  the 
Federal  authorities  took  steps  to  oust  from  public  service 
every  employee  who,  in  any  manner,  manifested  his  dis- 
approval of  the  acts  of  the  Government.^ 

On  February  13th,  Calles  began  sending  telegrams  to 
the  State  authorities,  calling  upon  them  to  enforce  Articles 
3,  27  and  130  of  the  Constitution,  and  especially  the  clause 
of  Article  130  which  refers  to  the  number  of  priests  in  each 
State. 

The  standing  Committee  of  the  Federal  Congress 
appointed  a sub-committee  to  cooperate  with  CaUes  in  ^^all 
his  acts  concerning  the  religious  situation. 

The  Governor  of  Potosi  replied  that  he  would  do  what 
he  could  at  once  and  that,  if  necessary,  he  would  call  an 
extra  session  of  the  State  legislature  to  deal  with  the 
religious  matter.  On  February  12th,  he  issued  an  order 
declaring  that,  from  that  day,  not  more  than  twenty-five 
priests  would  be  permitted  to  function  in  the  State  of 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


43 


Potosi.  The  State  has  a population  of  more  than  625,000. 
The  number  of  priests  in  the  State  on  the  date  of  the  decree 
was  ninety-five.  Seventy  of  them,  approximately  75  per 
cent,  were  suppressed.  The  people  of  Potosi  protested  and 
carried  their  appeal  into  the  District  Court  in  the  Capitol 
of  the  State.  The  Court  found  the  order  of  the  Governor 
unconstitutional. 

The  Governor,  refusing  to  abide  by  the  decision  of  the 
Court,  sent  troops  through  the  streets  and  forcibly  took 
possession  of  the  churches  on  the  pretext  that  they  had  been 
abandoned  by  the  priests  who  had  refused  to  solicit  the 
license  required  for  conducting  public  worship. 

Thereupon,  the  populace  attacked  the  troops  and,  to 
avoid  bloodshed,  the  Governor  conceded  the  opening  of  not 
more  than  ten  of  the  churches.  Later,  a committee  of  lay- 
men conferred  with  the  Governor  and  convinced  him  he 
must  obey  the  orders  of  the  Court.  The  Governor,  on  March 
21st,  authorized  the  opening  of  all  the  churches,  but  refused 
to  amend  his  order  regarding  the  number  of  priests. 

The  Governor  of  Puebla  did  not  deem  a special  session 
of  the  State  legislature  necessary,  but  took  up  the  work 
of  persecution  at  once.  On  February  16th,  he  issued  an 
order  to  all  convents  and  schools  in  the  State,  allowing 
forty-eight  hours  within  which  to  comply  with  the  Con- 
stitution. He  fixed  two  hundred  and  seventy-three  as  the 
number  of  priests  to  be  allowed  in  the  State  and  ordered  all 
members  of  religious  orders  engaged  in  teaching  to  comply 
with  the  Constitution,  to  cease  wearing  the  religious  habit, 
nor  any  other  visible  emblem  of  religion  in  the  school. 
All  chapels  in  the  schools  were  ordered  closed.  The  police 
and  courts  were  called  upon  to  neglect  nothing  in  their 
effort  to  carry  out  the  instructions. 

The  Archbishop  of  Puebla,  in  a dignified  appeal  to  the 
State  legislature,  denounced  the  order  reducing  the  number 
of  priests  as  unconstitutional,  because  the  number  allowed 
being  less  than  one  priest  for  four  thousand  Catholics  was 
insufficient,  and  demanded,  before  adopting  any  regulations, 
an  effort  be  made  to  ascertain  the  needs  of  the  State. 

Only  eleven  of  the  twenty-eight  States  of  the  Mexican 
Union  have  complied  with  instructions  received  from  Calles. 


44 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


The  number  of  priests  has  been  reduced 


In  Vera  Cruz 

from  195  to  38 

“ Pueblo 

(( 

330  to  270 

Tabasco 

(( 

85  to  40 

Oaxaca 

(( 

180  to  30 

Jalisco 

(( 

480  to  250 

Colima 

( ( 

65  to  20 

Michoacan 

a 

525  to  50 

Nuevo  Leon 

a 

225  to  100 

Yucatan..... 

iC 

70  to  40 

Potosi 

n 

95  to  25 

Tamaulipas..... 

(C 

85  to  12 

“ ELEVEN  STATES 

u 

2,335  to  875 

In  these  measures,  reducing  thus  unreasonably  the 
number  of  priests,  the  Mexican  authorities  can  have  but 
one  object,  that  of  disrupting  and  wrecking  the  entire 
organization  of  the  Church.  A bishop  who  would  undertake 
to  comply  with  a decree  such  as  this  would  find  himself  in 
the  impossible  position  of  having  to  select  from  among  the 
priests  those  who  are  to  remain  in  their  parishes  and  those 
who  are  to  be  denied  the  right  to  exercise  their  ministry. 
Controversy  is  unavoidable.  Last  year,  under  the  leader- 
ship of  Luis  Morones,  the  actual  Minister  of  Trade  and 
Industry,  an  absurd  attempt  was  made  to  organize  a 
schismatic  church  to  be  known  as  the  National  Church  of 
Mexico.  The  people  of  Mexico  repudiated  this  attempt  to 
turn  them  away  from  their  faith.  There  can  be  no  doubt 
that  the  laws  denying  to  thousands  of  priests  the  right  to 
function  as  Catholic  priests,  the  closing  of  hundreds  of 
Catholic  Churches,  the  denial  of  an  opportunity  to  attend 
public  services  to  millions  of  Catholics,  is  a deliberate  at- 
tempt to  drive  the  Catholics  of  Mexico  into  the  creation  of 
an  independent  church.  It  is  a diabolical  plot  to  divide  the 
Catholics  of  Mexico;  to  drive  great  numbers  from  their 
loyalty  to  the  Catholic  Church  and,  by  dividing  the  wor- 
shipers, bring  about  the  ruin  of  religion. 

Thank  God  for  the  faith  and  courage  of  the  Catholic 
men  and  women  of  Mexico,  who  will,  in  spite  of  all,  remain 
loyal  to  God  and  Holy  Church,  and  in  the  end,  restore  to 
their  own  nation  the  rule  of  justice  and  right ! The  fact  that. 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


45 


of  the  thousands  of  priests  in  Mexico,  not  one  has  been  found 
willing  to  accept  the  conditions  of  the  Government  is  a 
glowing  tribute  to  the  faith  and  the  manly  courage  of  the 
Catholic  priests  of  Mexico. 


OUR  DUTY  AS  AMERICANS 

Neither  the  American  people  nor  the  American  Gov- 
ernment has  any  desire  to  intervene  by  force  in  the  affairs 
of  the  Mexican  nation. 

We  must,  first  and  last,  promote  the  cause  of  peace. 
An  enlightened  intercourse  based  on  fuller  knowledge  and 
understanding  of  the  facts  must  be  encouraged.  Thus 
guided,  the  right-thinking  and  justice-loving  men  and 
women  of  Mexico,  if  allow^ed  their  inalienable  rights  of 
freedom  to  think  and  to  vote,  will  rescue  their  country  and 
its  administration  from  the  slough  of  religious  persecution 
and  of  tyranny  into  which  it  has  been  misled. 

There  is  no  doubt  that  our  own  country,  when  it  ut- 
tered the  Monroe  Doctrine,  assumed  a measure  of  real 
responsibility  to  maintain  the  independence  under  a demo- 
cratic government  of  the  republics  of  this  continent — to 
defend  against  tyranny  and  usurpation  the  peoples  of  those 
republics. 

The  Monroe  Doctrine  explicitly  protested  against  the 
acquisition  on  this  continent  of  any  material  foothold  by 
any  government  inimical  in  tradition  to  the  principles  of 
our  American  Government.  By  that  pronouncement,  the 
United  States  gave  notice  it  would  oppose  even  by  physical 
force  such  acquisition  of  territory.  If  the  acquisition  of 
territory  may  be  injurious  and  perhaps  eventually  fatal  to 
the  stability  or  well  being  of  our  owui  government  and  our 
own  institutions,  may  not  the  dissemination  of  principles, 
without  any  acquisition  of  territory,  be  equally  injurious 
and  fatal. 

There  is  no  thought  with  us  of  the  use  of  physical 
force  or  of  any  of  those  measures  that  lead  to  war.  War  and 
the  thought  of  war  are  abhorrent  to  us.  This  should  not 
blind  us  to  the  urgent  necessity  of  both  understanding  the 
crisis  and  of  being  insistent  in  the  presentation  and  defense 


46 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


of  those  truths  that  alone  will  save  the  crisis  from  catas- 
trophe. 

The  danger  today  is  no  less  grave  than  when  seizure  of 
physical  territory  on  this  continent  was  threatened  by  foreign 
powers.  That  threat  spelt  ultimately,  as  the  United  States 
saw,  the  death  of  liberty  in  the  young  republics  to  the 
south,  and  perhaps  the  death  of  liberty  in  our  own  land. 
The  danger  today  is  more  subtle,  more  insidious.  If  the 
principles  of  liberty  and  true  liberalism  can  be  denied  with 
impunity  in  Mexico,  they  may  be  so  denied  in  other  re- 
publics of  Central  or  South  America.  They  may  be  ques- 
tioned in  our  own  country,  and  if  allowed  to  advance,  may 
undermine  our  own  understanding  and  our  own  enjoyment 
of  true  liberty.  Whatever  minor  problem  the  Mexican 
situation  presents,  this  is  the  major  problem — this  is  the 
problem — that  challenges  every  right  thinking  American 
and  on  which  America  must  both  speak  and  act  for  its  own 
defense. 

The  Republics  of  America  are  not  only  at  the  threshold 
of  a period  of  rapid  population  growth  and  industrial 
development;  they  are  equally  with  the  rest  of  the  world 
to  feel  the  influence  of  the  new  political  and  social  doctrines. 

The  problem  which  confronts  our  country  today,  in 
common  with  its  neighbors  of  America,  is : Shall  we  continue 
to  maintain  the  high  standards  of  justice,  those  eternal 
principles  of  human  rights,  upon  which  our  system  is 
founded  and  which  are  the  life-blood  of  our  nation;  or,  shall 
we  stand  idly  by  while  systems  develop  which  deny  and 
denounce  those  principles?  Are  we  to  be  as  zealous  today 
in  safeguarding  our  precious  political  heritage  as  were  our 
fathers  one  hundred  years  ago,  not  guarding  in  rigid,  fossil 
sameness,  but  conserving  the  foundations  upon  which  it  is 
erected,  permitting  it  to  grow  and  develop  and  become 
adjusted  to  the  changing  conditions  of  human  life? 

In  Mexico,  today,  we  are  witnesses  of  widespread, 
radical  social  changes.  The  Mexican  nation  has  survived 
fifteen  years  of  travail  by  which  that  nation  has  seen  her 
moral  and  her  physical  strength  sapped,  and  wasted  until 
she  lies  prostrate — helpless  in  the  hands  of  her  assailants. 

Noble  indeed  was  the  cry  of  1911.  We  fight  not  for 
the  overthrow  of  one  tyrant  to  set  another  on  his  throne! 
Alas,  for  the  liberalism  of  those  days,  which  demanded  for 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


47 


man  the  greatest  amount  of  individual  freedom  and  liberty, 
and  for  the  township  and  province  the  greatest  amount  of 
political  autonomy  consistent  with  national  existence ! 

A new  tyrant  has  indeed  set  himself  up  in  Mexico! 
The  tyrant  of  secularism,  who  defies  God — denounces  re- 
ligion as  man^s  worst  enemy — and  tramples  under  foot  the 
rights  with  which  man  enters  the  world  and  of  which  he 
may  not  justly  be  deprived. 

Loyalty  to  our  own  destiny  demands  that  we  defend 
our  institutions  as  we  did  not  hesitate  to  do  of  old.  That 
we  stay  the  hand  which  would  set  up  on  our  continent  a 
system  and  a law  subversive  of  that  which  we  have  in- 
herited. Our  sympathy  must  go  out  to  the  suffering  and 
the  lowly  of  Mexico  whose  rights  are  being  trampled  upon. 

Popular  sovereignty  is  not  functioning  in  Mexico.  It 
is  not  functioning  not  because  the  people  are  unworthy  or 
incapable,  but  because  its  place  has  been  usurped. 

It  behooves  us  to  know  conditions  in  our  sister  Republic 
with  a full  and  honest  knowledge.  It  behooves  us  to  ex- 
tend the  helping  hand  of  moral  and  material  support  to 
those  who  would  devote  themselves  to  the  upbuilding  on 
our  southern  border  of  a nation  that  at  least  recognizes  as 
does  our  own  those  principles  of  the  fundamental  rights  of 
man  which  are  not  merely  national,  but  international — 
which  are  the  corner-stone  of  that  common  union  of  an  equal 
humanity  for  which  we  labor.  It  is  our  bounden  duty  to 
defend  these  against  the  teachers  of  new  doctrines,  the 
preachers  of  strange  beliefs,  to  the  end  that,  functioning 
freely,  the  people  of  Mexico  may  rescue  their  nation  from 
the  morass  into  which  she  is  being  led. 


THE  HOLY  FATHER  ADDRESSES  THE  CATHOLICS 

OF  MEXICO 


‘‘To  His  Venerable  Brothers  Joseph,  Archbishop  of  Mexico  City, 
and  the  other  Archbishops  and  Bishops  of  Mexico,  Pius  XI 
sends  Greetings  and  Apostolic  Blessing. 

“Venerable  Brothers:  The  fatherly  solicitude  with  which  We, 
who  by  reason  of  the  high  office  bestowed  upon  Us  through  the  will  of 
God,  follow  all  the  faithful  of  the  whole  world,  demands  in  a very  special 
manner  that  We  love  with  a singular  love  those  whom  We  see  stricken 
with  graver  ills,  and  who,  therefore,  need  all  the  more  the  zealous  care 
of  their  common  Father.  Hardly  had  We  been  raised  to  the  Chair  of 
St.  Peter  before  We  very  gladly  directed  towards  you.  Venerable 
Brothers,  Our  most  considerate  and  loving  attention  as  We  realized 
that  you  were  beset  by  such  afflictions  as  certainly  bring  shame  to  a 
people  almost  totally  Catholic,  and  who,  at  the  same  time,  make  up  a 
civil  society  cultured  and  adorned  with  all  the  arts  of  civihzation. 

“It  is  scarcely  necessary  for  Us  to  tell  you  how  wicked  are  the 
regulations  and  laws  invoked  against  the  Catholic  citizens  of  Mexico 
which  have  been  sanctioned  by  officials  hostile  to  the  Church,  and  which 
by  their  enforcement  have  long  oppressed  you.  You  are  fully  aware 
that  these  laws  are  far  from  being  ‘reasonable  laws’,  nor  are  they  useful 
and  necessary  for  the  common  good  as  assuredly  all  laws  should  be. 
On  the  contrary,  they  do  not  seem  to  merit  even  the  name  of  laws. 
Our  Predecessor,  Benedict  XV,  of  happy  memory,  accorded  you  de- 
served praise  because  you  rightly  and  moved  by  your  i^ligious  beliefs 
took  exception  to  these  laws  by  solemnly  protesting  against  them,  which 
action  of  Pope  Benedict  We,  by  this  Our  letter,  do  not  only  ratify  but 
make  Our  very  own.  Indeed  We  are  moved  all  the  more  insistently 
to  utter  this  public  protest  and  condemnation  of  such  laws  seeing  that, 
day  after  day,  the  warfare  against  the  Catholic  religion  is  being  w’aged 
more  bitterly  by  the  rulers  of  the  Republic,  so  that  assuredly  whatsoever 
lies  within  Our  power  to  aid  the  people  of  Mexico  towards  the  estab- 
lishment of  peace,  even  that  now  becomes  both  ineffective  and  useless, 
all  of  which  will  result  to  the  great  detriment  of  your  beloved  country. 
Who  is  there  that  does  not  know  that  Our  Apostolic  Delegate  whom  you, 
two  years  ago,  received  with  such  marks  of  appreciation  and  joy,  was 
expelled  from  Mexico  City  as  if  he  were  a common  enemy  of  the  Republic? 

48 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


49 


This  act  not  only  betrayed  lack  of  a sense  of  justice  and  a breach  of 
good  faith,  but  was  likewise  a most  grievous  insult  both  to  Us,  to  the 
Hierarchy,  and  the  whole  people  of  Mexico. 

“And  if,  under  the  circumstances.  We  refrained  deliberately  from 
a public  protest — which  no  one  can  deny  this  act  rightly  and  richly 
deserved — and  bore  patiently  for  a long  time  the  insult,  imploring 
that  you  too  should  endure  it  with  calmness.  Our  hesitation  was  due 
not  only  to  the  sentiments  of  peace  which  ever  actuate  Us,  but  also  to 
that  consuming  hope  which  We  cherished  in  Our  fatherly  heart  that 
eventually  the  rulers  of  the  Republic  would  acknowledge  and  volun- 
tarily accept  the  certain  and  well-established  rights  of  Our  Apostolic 
Delegate. 

“However,  this  temperateness  and  courtesy  on  Our  part  failed  of 
a happy  result  although  the  civil  rulers  had  openly  promised  that  they 
would  receive  Our  Apostolic  Delegate  and  that  they  would  in  no  way 
offend  against  his  dignity  nor  hamper  him  in  the  exercise  of  his  official 
duties.  You  already  know  how  painful  to  Us  was  the  unexpected  and 
altogether  undreamt  of  tidings  that  these  same  rulers  of  the  country, 
contrary  to  all  etiquette  and  custom,  had  refused  to  honor  the  obliga- 
tions which  they  had  assumed,  and  had  forbidden  Our  Venerable 
Brother,  Seraphim  Cimino,  whom  they  ought  to  have  received  as  Our 
Apostolic  Delegate,  to  return  to  Mexico  when  his  failing  health  required 
his  temporary  absence  from  the  country,  his  departure  being  grasped 
as  an  occasion  for  their  deed,  but  without  any  sound  cause  or  justi- 
fication. 

“Wherefore,  the  rulers  of  that  Republic  by  their  refusal  to  accept 
Our  Apostolic  Delegate  have,  at  the  same  time,  attempted  utterly  to 
repudiate  Our  own  ministry  which  pactically  all  rulers  the  world  over 
accept  as  a ministry  of  peace.  They  then  turn  themselves  to  the  false 
argument  of  the  necessity  of  their  protecting  the  Republic  in  order 
that  they  may  justify  the  happenings  which  take  place  in  your  country 
to  the  detriment  of  its  Catholic  citizens. 

“Day  after  day  these  hostile  laws  and  regulations  are  more  bitterly 
enforced  and  if  this  continues,  the  common  rights  of  citizenship  will  be 
automatically  denied  Catholics,  and  the  functions  and  ministry  of  the 
Christian  religion  itself  will  die.  This  liberty  of  action,  moreover, 
which  the  rulers  of  the  country  deny  the  Catholic  Church,  they  freely 
bestow  upon  a schismatic  sect  called  the  National  Church;  although 
this  sect  is  in  conflict  with  the  sacred  rights  of  the  Roman  Church,  they 
have  fostered  its  beginnings  and  its  undertakings,  while,  on  the  other 
hand,  they  consider  you  enemies  of  the  Republic  for  the  sole  reason 
that  you  have  preserved  intact  and  in  its  entirety  the  patrimony  of 


50 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


your  ancestral  faith.  Yet  afflicted  and  saddened  as  We  are  by  these 
events,  there  is  one  thing  that  has  brought  great  solace  to  Our  heart, 
for  We  know  that  the  Mexican  people  are  strenuously  combatting  the 
machinations  of  these  schismatics.  Wherefore,  while  We  profoundly 
thank  the  Providence  of  God,  We  beg  of  you.  Venerable  Brothers,  to 
speak  loudly  your  praise  of  all  the  faithful  of  the  Republic  of  Mexico 
and  vehemently  to  exhort  them  to  stand  steadfast  in  their  defense  of 
the  Catholic  religion.  Let  Us  repeat  here  the  words  which  We  uttered 
last  year  at  the  Sacred  Consistory  held  on  the  Fourteenth  of  December 
in  the  presence  of  a large  gathering  of  distinguished  Cardinals  and 
Bishops,  at  a moment  when  We  were  deeply  stirred  by  the  calamities 
that  molested  Us.  At  that  time  We  said:  ‘We  are  scarcely  able  to 
conceive  a hope  for  better  days  except  they  come  as  the  result  of 
prompt  assistance  on  the  part  of  a Merciful  God,  which  help  We  daily 
implore,  and  from  the  development  amongst  the  people  themselves  of 
a harmonious  co-ordination  of  energy  that  will  bring  about  a united 
Catholic  action. 

“Our  especial  advice  and  commands  to  you  are  to  this  end  only, 
that  We  may,  by  Our  fatherly  love,  spur  you  on  to  develop  ‘Catholic 
action’,  by  mutual  cooperation  and  the  highest  education  of  the  flock 
committed  to  the  pastoral  care  of  each  of  you.  We  say  Catholic  Action, 
for,  in  the  present  sad  condition  of  affairs,  it  is  supremely  necessary. 
Venerable  Brothers,  that  you,  together  with  the  whole  clergy  and  every 
organization  of  Catholics,  most  studiously  hold  yourselves  entirely  aloof 
from  every  kind  of  political  party  so  that  you  will  not  give  the  enemies 
of  the  Catholic  faith  the  pretext  to  contend  that  your  religion  is  bound 
up  with  any  political  party  or  faction.  Therefore,  all  Catholics  of  the 
Republic  of  Mexico  are  forbidden  as  such  to  establish  any  political 
party  under  the  name  of  Catholic.  Above  all,  bishops  and  priests,  in 
keeping  with  their  praiseworthy  record  of  the  past,  must  not  become 
members  of  any  political  party  nor  write  for  the  journals  of  any 
political  faction  for  their  ministry  necessarily  extends  to  all  the  faithful 
and  to  all  citizens  as  well. 

“These,  therefore.  Venerable  Brothers,  are  our  counsels  and  com- 
mands. At  the  ,same  time,  the  faithful  who  must  and  will  doubtless 
faithfully  follow  them  and  put  them  into  practice  cannot  be  forbidden 
to  exercise  these  civic  rights  and  duties  which  they  have  in  common 
with  all  other  citizens.  In  fact,  their  very  faith  and  the  common  welfare 
of  Religion  and  Country  require  that  they  make  the  best  use  of  such 
rights  and  duties.  Even  the  clergy  cannot  refrain  altogether  from  an 
interest  in  civic  affairs  or  put  aside  completely  all  care  and  solicitude 
for  the  things  of  public  life.  Indeed,  although  holding  themselves 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


61 


studiously  aloof  from  every  attachment  to  any  party,  they  ought,  in 
keeping  with  their  priestly  office  and  safeguarding  the  sacredness  of  their 
ministry,  to  promote  the  welfare  of  their  country  by  diligent  and 
religious  exercise  of  their  civil  rights  and  duties  and  by  setting  a good 
example  which  the  faithful  can  follow,  so  that  each  one  of  them  will 
studiously  comply  with  their  public  obligations  as  the  laws  of  God  and 
of  the  Church  demand. 

“For  the  attainment  of  this  most  noble  end,  your  clergy,  while 
they  must,  as  We  have  said  and  exhort  again  and  again,  be  free  and 
aloof  from  all  partisan  contentions,  will  nevertheless  find  open  to  them 
a wide  field  in  which  they  can  spend  their  energy  in  the  interest  of 
religion  and  morals  and  culture,  as  well  as  in  the  betterment  of  economic 
and  social  conditions,  thus  training  their  people,  especially  the  youths 
pursuing  higher  studies  and  workingmen,  to  think  and  to  act  as  becomes 
Catholics.  There  is  no  doubt  in  Our  mind  that  if  you  correspond 
faithfully  to  these  Our  exhortations  and  follow  them  earnestly  and 
diligently  the  heavy  afflictions  which  have  long  beset  the  noble  Mexican 
people  will  at  length,  with  the  help  of  God,  happily  abate  and  cease. 
Meanwhile,  We  most  lovingly  impart  Our  Apostolic  Blessing  both  to 
you.  Venerable  Brothers,  and  to  the  clergy  and  faithful  of  each  of  you  as 
well  as  to  the  whole  Mexican  people,  as  a token  of  Heavenly  blessings 
and  a pledge  of  Our  singular  love  for  you. 

“Given  at  Rome,  at  St.  Peter’s,  the  Second  day  of  February,  1926, 
in  the  Fourth  Year  of  Our  Pontificate. 

“PIUS  XF' 


JOINT  PASTORAL  BY  BISHOPS  OF  MEXICO 

Venerable  Brothers  and  Beloved  Sons: 

“Let  us  turn  our  eyes  to  the  legal  condition  and  present  state  of  the 
Catholic  Church  in  Mexico  and  we  shall  see  that  the  present  conditions 
are  unbearable  and  with  what  reason  we  have  believed  that  the  time  has 
come  to  say:  NON  POSSUMUS! 

“But  as  it  is  not  our  desire  to  embitter  minds,  we  shall  content 
ourselves  with  a simple  enumeration  of  the  precepts  of  the  Constitution 
and  of  their  violent  application,  omitting  all  comment.” 

The  first  subject  taken  up  is  the  contents  of  the  Constitution,  as 
it  affects  persons  and  things,  and  the  Pastoral  points  out  that  it  does  not 
recognize  the  juridical  personality  of  the  Church : 


52 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


‘The  Constitution  establishes  the  absolute  separation  of  Church 
and  State  and  Congress  is  deprived  of  the  right  to  establish  or  prohibit 
any  religion  (Art.  130)  and  freedom  is  granted  to  all  to  profess  any 
religion  according  to  their  conscience  (Arts.  24  and  130). 

“Given  the  principles  expressed  in  the  paragraphs  of  section  A, 
page  five  of  this  Pastoral,  we  should  have  nothing  to  object  to,  but  the 
Constitution  explicitly  fails  to  recognize  the  juridical  personality  of  the 
churches  and  the  federal  authorities  are  authorized  to  exercise  the 
intervention  designated  by  the  laws  in  the  matter  of  worship  and 
exterior  discipline  (Art.  130).’’ 

Constitutional  Inhibitions  Criticized 

As  regards  the  ministers  of  religion,  the  Pastoral  points  out  that: 

“1.  They  are  not  considered  as  such  but  as  simple  members  of  a 
profession  (Art.  130),  and  contrary  to  the  attitude  toward  other  pro- 
fessions, it  is  required  that  they  be  Mexican  by  birth  (Art.  130) ; State 
legislatures  are  given  authority  to  determine  the  maximum  number 
(Art.  130) ; they  are  prohibited  from  the  exercise  of  their  political  rights 
(Arts.  82,  55,  59,  130)  and  from  the  exercise  of  their  purely  civil  rights 
(Arts.  3,  27,  59,  130).  Their  religious  action  is  fiscalized,  for  they  are 
compelled  to  go,  accompanied  by  10  residents  of  the  neighborhood,  to 
inform  the  authorities  of  the  fact  that  they  have  taken  charge  of  some 
church  or  that  they  have  moved  to  another  place  (Art.  130).  In  short, 
while  they  are  denied  all  juridical  personality  as  ministers,  and  are 
considered  as  ordinary  members  of  a profession,  they  are  deprived, 
almost  absolutely,  of  their  rights  as  citizens  and  this  even  though  they 
be  Mexicans  by  birth. 

“The  taking  of  vows  and  religious  orders  are  absolutely  prohibited” 
(Art.  5). 

The  rulings  of  the  Constitution  on  other  things  of  a religious 
character  are  described  as  follows: 

“ ‘Matrimony’  is  declared  to  come  under  the  exclusive  jurisdiction 
of  the  civil  authority  and  enjoys  no  validity  beyond  that  which  is 
attributed  to  it  thereby  (Art.  130).  If  the  State  would  confine  itself 
solely  to  the  declaration  that  a civil  marriage  is  necessary  for  civil 
purposes,  we  should  have  nothing  to  object. 

“ ‘Public  worship’  is  confined  to  the  interior  of  churches  (Art.  124). 
Even  here  it  is  made  subject  to  government  intervention  and  supervision 
(Arts.  24  and  130). 

“ ‘Education’  is  free  (Art.  3),  but  it  must  be  secular  in  all  primary 
schools,  even  private  schools,  which  are  subject  to  Government  super- 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


53 


vision,  not  merely  in  regard  to  hygiene  but  also  in  regard  to  the  subjects 
taught,  the  number  and  quality  of  the  professors,  etc.  (Art.  3),  and 
ministers  of  religion  and  religious  orders  are  prohibited  from  establishing 
and  directing  primary  schools  (Art.  3)  and  official  recognition  is  denied 
studies  taken  in  church  establishments.”  (Art.  130). 

“ ‘The  Press’  which  is  considered  religious  by  program,  title  or  by 
its  ordinary  tendencies  may  not  pubhsh  information  or  opinions  con- 
cerning national  political  matters”  (Art.  130). 

“Churches  are  declared  to  be  the  property  of  the  nation  and  the 
Government  may  assign  them  to  other  uses  (Art.  27).  New  churches 
may  be  erected  only  with  the  authorization  of  the  Secretary  of  the 
Interior”  (Art.  130). 

Confiscation  of  Church  Property 

“The  Constitution  abolishes  respect  for  churches  (Arts.  27  and  130) 
and  respect  for  bishoprics,  country  houses,  seminaries,  homes,  schools, 
religious  houses,  private  charitable  institutions  . . . (Art.  27). 

Ministers  are  prohibited  from  inheriting  even  from  private  individuals 
except  their  close  relations  (Art.  130).  The  Church  is  prohibited  in 
general  from  exercising  any  ownership  whatsoever  over  real  estate  or 
capital  raised  thereon  (Art.  27).  Any  property  which  the  Church 
may  now  possess,  either  of  itself  or  through  an  intermediary,  is  ordered 
to  be  turned  over  to  the  nation,  and  the  people  are  granted  the  right  to 
denounce  property  held  by  the  Church  or  its  ministers  in  this  case, 
presumption  being  considered  sufficient  proof  on  which  to  base  the 
denunciation”  (Art.  27). 

After  mentioning  the  “unique  clause”  which  says  that  “trials  for 
infractions  of  Article  130  will  never  be  jury  trials”,  the  Bishops  say: 

“After  this  enumeration  of  constitutional  precepts,  it  may  be  asked 
can  the  Church  fulfill  her  divine  mission  when  such  limitations  are 
placed  upon  her?  Can  she  develop  her  civilizing  and  charitable  influence 
if  she  is  prohibited  from  disposing  of  the  very  elements  which  are  indis- 
pensable for  her  existence?  Is  the  full  spiritual  development  which 
Jesus  Christ  demands  at  all  times  possible  when  priests  and  churches 
are  limited  to  an  insufficient  number?  Is  it  not  irrational,  is  it  not 
unjust  that  priests  should  be  denied  the  rights  proper  for  every  citizen, 
and  that  unbearable  and  even  humiliating  charges  be  placed  upon 
them?  Can  parents  fulfill  the  sacred  duty  imposed  on  them  by  God, 
that  of  giving  their  children  a Christian  education,  if  Catholic  schools 
are  closed  and  they  are  forced  to  send  their  children  to  schools  which 
are  without  God  and  which  are  wholly  paganized? 


54 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


‘Tt  is  obvious  that  this  is  impossible,  and  that  it  is  necessary  to  tell 
the  truth  in  order  to  safeguard  the  inalienable  rights  of  the  Church  and 
the  very  sacred  rights  of  the  individual  conscience  and  of  the  family.” 

The  Present  Persecution 

“The  enumeration  of  the  vexations  suffered  at  the  time  of  the 
revolution  would  be  long  and  tiresome.  Omitting  them  completely, 
let  us  pass  on  to  the  facts  of  the  day. 

“They  have  legislated  even  to  the  extreme  of  suppressing  two  dio- 
ceses of  the  Republic.  There  is  question  of  actually  prohibiting  some 
prelates  from  residence  in  their  sees;  the  homes  of  others  have  been 
taken  and  their  persons  molested. 

“Under  the  guise  of  patriotism,  numerous  foreign  priests  have 
been  withdrawn  from  their  ministry  and  expelled  with  violence,  although 
by  their  labors  they  were  and  are  deserving  of  our  gratitude  and  were 
most  profitable  factors  in  the  religious  life  of  our  country. 

“It  is  desired  to  reduce  the  number  even  of  the  Mexican  priests  to 
an  absolutely  insufficient  degree;  it  is  desired  to  eliminate  them  all  by 
placing  humiliating  and  impossible  conditions  upon  them,  for  instance 
the  condition  which  has  been  imposed  in  some  places,  and  which  is  not 
required  of  any  one  in  any  country,  namely,  the  condition  of  marriage. 

“An  attempt  is  made  to  reduce  vocations  by  closing  the  seminaries 
or  making  their  existence  difficult,  as  has  happened  in  some  States. 

“With  grave  injury  to  civilization,  to  morality,  to  religion  and  the 
rights  of  parents,  private  Catholic  schools  have  been  closed  or  official 
and  -completely  anti-constitutional  conditions  have  been  imposed  on 
Them. 

“Self-sacrificing  virgins,  whose  prayers  and  purity  of  life  stay  the 
arm  of  Divine  justice,  have  been  thrown  into  the  streets  while  they  were 
giving  care  to  helpless  children,  to  the  aged  infirm,  or  the  sick  of  all 
classes. 

“Catholic  citizens  have  been  prevented  from  exercising  their  civic 
rights  and  the  discharge  of  public  offices  to  which  they  had  been  desig- 
nated by  popular  choice,  and  have  also  been  prohibited  from  the  peace- 
ful manifestation  of  their  ideas  and  the  lawful  exercise  of  protest. 

“We  have  been  deprived  of  our  churches. 

Charge  Discrimination 

“Furthermore,  we  are  not  unaware  of  the  fact  that  while  Catholi- 
cism is  pursued,  other  religious  denominations  enjoy  immunity  and  even 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


55 


benevolent  support,  and  foreign  propagandists  are  permitted  all  sorts  of 
intemperance  of  speech  and  calumny.” 

The  next  section  of  the  Pastoral  deals  with  the  present  duties  of 
Catholics,  who  are  urged  to  exercise  their  rights  and  duties  in  the 
three-fold  field  of  religious,  social  and  political  action. 

In  regard  to  religious  action.  Catholics  are  urged  to  “work  and 
pray”,  to  hear  Mass  frequently,  to  frequent  the  Sacraments,  to  mortify 
their  passions  and  to  intensify  their  Christian  life  in  order  to  implore 
the  divine  grace  necessary  for  the  reform  of  pubhc  customs. 

In  the  field  of  Catholic  social  and  economic  action.  Catholics  are 
exhorted  to  remain  faithful  to  those  principles  set  forth  by  Pope  Leo  XIII 
in  the  Encyclicals  “Immortale  Dei”  and  “Rerum  Novarum”,  but  it  is 
made  clear  that  all  associations  working  along  these  lines  must  remain 
strictly  above  and  outside  of  all  politics,  in  accordance  with  the  admoni- 
tions of  Pope  Pius  XI. 

As  for  politcal  action,  the  Pastoral  declares  that  by  this  term  is 
understood  “all  activity  related  to  the  temporal  government  of  the 
nation,  whether  in  the  exercise  of  the  Executive,  Legislative  and  Judicial 
Powers,  or  in  collaboration  with  the  Government,  as  in  the  just  con- 
stitution or  reforming  of  laws  or  the  substitution  of  one  government 
for  another  by  means  of  popular  elections.” 

“We  have  repeatedly  stated  that  we  have  been  and  are  foreign  to 
any  changes  in  government”,  the  Bishops  declare.  “We  content  our- 
selves with  manifesting  to  those  in  authority  at  any  time  whatsoever, 
the  justice  of  our  rights.  But  as  all  the  aim  of  human  societies  are 
essentially  subordinate  to  the  end  of  man,  which  is  the  proper  concern  of 
the  Church,  for  this  reason  the  Church,  always  remaining  above  and 
outside  of  political  partisanship,  has  laid  down  rules  for  pohtical  action 
and  has  instructed  the  faithful  concerning  their  important  duties  in 
this  respect. 

“It  is  for  us  and  for  the  priests  to  remind  the  faithful  of  their 
pohtical  duties  and  inculcate  in  them  the  serene  and  lofty  principles 
of  the  Church  in  this  respect,  but  we  leave  the  exercise  of  pohtical 
action  exclusively  to  the  laity,  not  the  personalistic  and  petty  politics, 
but  the  great  deep  politics  which  is  guided  by  principles  and  seeks  the 
common  good. 

“Catholic  laymen  must  resolutely  enter  this  field  since  as  citizens 
they  must  concern  themselves  with  the  welfare  of  their  country  and  as 
Catholic  citizens  they  are  under  the  obhgation  to  work  by  legal  means 
for  the  respect  of  the  rights  of  the  Church  and,  at  this  time,  for  the 
abrogation  of  laws  contrary  to  her  liberty. 


56 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


Obligation  of  Catholics 

“Under  present  circumstances  the  intervention  of  Catholics  to 
obtain  the  liberty  of  the  Church  and  her  development,  together  with  the 
prosperity  of  the  nation,  is  not,  beloved  sons,  a simple  piece  of  advice 
which  we  are  giving  you,  but  a very  serious  obligation  of  conscience 
of  which  we  remind  you;  for  every  Mexican  should  procure  the  greatness 
of  his  country  and  the  liberty  of  the  Church.  Now,  less  than  ever, 
can  these  precious  treasures  be  obtained  by  isolated  efforts  without  the 
disciplined  collaboration  of  the  whole  nation.  Apathy  and  lack  of 
discipline  have  everywhere  and  always  been  the  cause  of  serious  evils. 

“Therefore,  in  fulfillment  of  our  duty,  we  exhort  Catholics  to  work 
for  the  good  of  the  nation;  and  we  advise  them  to  enlist  in  organizations 
which  teach  the  people  theoretically  and  practically  their  rights  and 
duties  as  citizens  and  organize  the  nation  for  the  defense  of  religious 
liberty,  always  remaining,  however,  outside  any  party  and  above  any 
party.’’ 


Reform  of  Constitution  Urgent 

The  last  part  of  the  Pastoral  contains  the  following  strong  statement 
under  the  title  of  “Declarations”; 

“We  must  declare  that  the  reform  of  the  Constitution  is  urgent  and 
brooks  no  delay. 

“At  the  time  of  its  promulgation  we  launched  our  peaceful  but 
vigorous  protest  which  was  praised  by  His  Holiness  Benedict  XV  and 
approved  and  praised  successively  by  the  Hierarchies  of  the  United 
States,  France  and  Spain  and,  separately,  by  twenty-five  prelates  of 
Latin-America  and  which,  under  date  of  February  2,  1926,  the  present 
Pontiff,  His  Holiness  Pius  XI,  approved  and  made  his  own  in  a letter 
directed  to  the  Mexican  Hierarchy. 

“Having  made  this  declaration,  we  then  entertained  the  hope  that 
when  the  passions  of  the  moment  should  sooner  or  later  be  calmed,  our 
government  would  understand  how  detrimental  and  hostile  to  almost  the 
totality  of  the  Mexican  people  was  the  application  of  the  articles  of  the 
Constitution  contrary  to  religious  liberty,  and  we  hoped  that  in  a spirit 
of  concord  they  would  not  be  enforced  and  that  we  should  return  to  a 
tolerable  ‘modus  vivendi.’ 

“Instructed  by  the  experience  of  long  years,  this  false  situation  did 
not  fail  to  inspire  us  with  grave  fears;  but  desirous  of  not  complicating 
the  afflicted  state  of  the  country,  we  decided  not  to  make  an  issue  but  to 
hope  that  the  quiet  evolution  of  ideas  and  events  would  bring  about  a 
better  understanding  between  legislators  and  people  and  that  after  ^ 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


67 


period  of  relative  tolerance  and  actual  peace  there  would  finally  be 
arrived  at  an  agreement  of  right  and  definite  peace  by  means  of  the 
peaceful  reform  of  our  Code. 

‘^Unfortunately,  despite  our  conciliatory  attitude  and  the  conduct, 
patient  to  the  point  of  heroism,  of  our  clergy  and  our  people,  religious 
persecution,  instead  of  being  calmed,  has  become  aggravated;  and  the 
public  declarations  and  recent  events  show  that  this  Constitution  is  to 
be  applied,  carried  to  extremes  and  even  distorted  on  our  account  and 
that  our  patience  is  to  be  met  by  a systematic  attack  making  as  legal. 

“Under  these  circumstances,  since  it  is  desired  to  impose  on  us 
Mexican  Catholics  urgently  and  definitely  a Constitution  contrary  to 
our  most  sacred  duties  of  conscience  and  to  our  most  undeniable  rights, 
it  is  logical  to  infer  that  it  is  our  duty  and  our  right  to  procure  without 
any  delay  and  by  all  lawful  means  that  this  Consitutituion  be  reformed 
to  satisfy  the  legitimate  aspirations  of  the  people  who  desire  to  enjoy 
full  liberty.  This  conduct  is  not  rebellion  because  the  Constitution  itself 
establishes  its  amendability  and  opens  the  way  for  reforms,  and  because 
it  is  a just  devotion  to  mandates  superior  to  human  law  and  to  the  just 
defense  of  legitimate  interests. 

“At  all  times,  and  particularly  at  the  present  time,  the  Church  takes 
a definite  position  and  avoids  extremes.  It  temporizes,  for  love  of  peace, 
in  conflicts  of  great  moment.  It  does  not  seek  conflict,  but  if  it  is  com- 
pelled either  to  renounce  its  liberty  and  to  disappear  in  fact  or  to  defend 
itself  legally  but  vigorously,  it  never  betrays  its  cause  which  is  that  of 
God  and  of  Country.” 


Recall  Carranza’s  Act 

The  Pastoral  then  quotes  the  bill  introduced  in  the  Mexican 
Congress  by  Carranza  and  published  in  the  Diario  Oficial  under  date  of 
November  21, 1918,  seeking  the  modification  of  Art.  3 of  the  Constitution 
of  1917  on  the  subject  of  education,  and  also  the  bill  introduced  by  him 
asking  Congress  to  modify  paragraphs  VII,  VIII  and  XVI  of  Art.  130. 
This  bill  was  published  in  the  Diario  Oficial  of  December  17,  1918. 
These  measures  are  quoted  as  a precedent  which  proves  that  the  present 
attitude  of  the  Mexican  Hierarchy,  in  demanding  constitutional  reforms, 
does  not  imply  “treason  to  the  nation”  as  has  been  asserted.  The 
letter  then  says; 

“Would  that  the  civil  authority,  desirous  of  the  common  welfare 
and  of  national  peace  after  so  many  years  of  sterile  conflict  between 
brothers,  following  the  course  initiated  by  President  Carranza,  would 
understand  that  it  should  pause  and  heed  our  declaration  as  the  voice  of 
the  great  majority  of  the  nation,  which  merely  demands  equality 


58 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


before  a law  of  true  religious  liberty,  similar  to  that  enjoyed  by  all 
religious  denominations  in  the  most  civilized  countries,  without  any 
prejudice  whatsoever  to  their  progress! 

“Would  that  it  might  hearken  to  our  sound  reasons  and  the  senti- 
ment of  the  people  so  repeatedly  expressed;  that  it  would  suspend,  for  a 
time,  the  application  of  the  persecutory  articles,  consult  loyally  the  will 
of  the  nation  and  grant  it  effectively  full  liberty  to  manifest  its  needs 
and  desires! 

“The  result  would  be  peace  and  prosperity  for  the  nation  and  the 
regaining  of  prestige  before  the  civilized  w'orld.” 

Exhort  to  Prayer 

In  closing,  the  Pastoral  reminds  the  faithful  that  the  success  of  the 
campaign  which  is  being  undertaken  depends  on  prayer,  Christian 
mortification  and  the  reformation  of  public  customs.  Catholics  are 
exhorted  to  remain  firm  in  faith,  living  with  Christian  sobriety  and 
constant  vigilance. 

“Let  us  make  ourselves  worthy  of  the  protection  of  Heaven  and 
cease  to  complain  that  Divine  Providence  does  not  help  us,  while  we 
cravenly  abandon  the  field  of  battle  and  offend  God  by  ever  graver 
sins.''  The  people  are  likewise  urged  to  receive  Holy  Communion  with 
great  frequency,  as  they  did  during  Lent,  and  to  implore  with  childlike 
confidence  the  protection  of  the  Virgin  of  Guadalupe. 

The  Pastoral  is  dated  April  21,  Feast  of  - the  Patronage  of  Saint 
Joseph,  and  is  signed  by  the  following  members  of  the  hierarchy: 

Jose,  Archbishop  of  Mexico;  Leopoldo,  Archbishop  of  Michoacan; 
Francisco,  Archbishop  of  Guadalajara;  Jose  Othon,  Archbishop  of 
Oaxaca;  Jose  Maria,  Archbishop  of  Durango;  Juan,  Archbishop  of 
Montorrey;  Pedro,  Archbishop  of  Puebla;  Martin,  Archbishop  of  Yuca- 
tan; Ignacio,  Bishop  of  Aguascalientes ; Francisco,  Bishop  of  Cuemavac; 
Amador,  Bishop  of  Colima;  Jesus  Maria,  Bishop  of  Saltillo;  Emerterio, 
Bishop  of  Leon;  Ignacio,  Bishop  of  Zacatecas;  Miguel,  Bishop  of  San 
Luis  Potosi;  Vicente,  Bishop  of  Tulancingo;  Manuel,  Bishop  of  Zamora; 
Juan  Maria,  Bishop  of  Sonora;  Jose  Guadalupe,  Bishop  of  Chilapa; 
Francisco,  Bishop  of  Queretare;  Rafael,  Bishop  of  Vera  Cruz;  Manuel, 
Bishop  of  Tepic;  Gerardo,  Bishop  of  Chiapas;  Antonio,  Bishop  of 
Chihuahua;  Leopoldo,  Bishop  of  Tacambaro;  Francisco  Maria,  Bishop 
of  Campeche;  Agustin,  Bishop  of  Sinaloa;  Nicolas,  Bishop  of  Papantla; 
Pascual,  Bishop  of  Tabasco;  Jose,  Bishop  of  Huejutla;  Jenaro,  Bishop 
of  Tehuan topee;  Serafin,  Bishop  of  Tamaulipas;  Luis,  Bishop  of  Huaha- 
pan;  Maximino,  Titular  Bishop  of  De  Derbe;  Luis,  Titular  Bishop  of 
Anemur;  Francisco,  Titular  Bishop  of  Dahora;  Jose  de  Jesus,  Titular 
Bishop  of  Cina  de  Galacia;  Antonio,  Titular  Bishop  of  Tralles. 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


59 


STATEMENT  OF  ADMINISTRATIVE  COMMITTEE 
NATIONAL  CATHOLIC  WELFARE  CONFERENCE 
APRIL  15,  1926 

Our  fellow  Catholics  in  Mexico  are  today  suffering  a most  unjust 
and  far-reaching  persecution  at  the  hands  of  the  present  Mexican 
Government.  Churches  have  been  confiscated ; priests  exiled ; the  people 
deprived  of  religious  ministration ; the  teaching  of  rehgion  banished  from 
the  schools.  On  March  6,  1926,  the  Mexican  Government  created  a 
special  bureau  in  the  office  of  the  Attorney-General  to  care  for  the 
rapid  increase  of  Church  property  daily  being  seized  by  the  Government. 

Much  attention  is  given  to  the  completion  of  commercial  treaties 
with  Mexico.  It  is  far  more  important,  far  more  essential  that  we  as 
Americans  should  actively  interest  ourselves  in  securing  for  the  people 
of  Mexico  the  fundamental  rights  of  religious,  educational,  and  civic 
freedom. 

The  Constitution  of  Mexico,  in  force  since  1917,  includes  in  its 
anti-religious  provisions  all  churches  and  ministers  of  every  denomina- 
tion. That  those  provisions  are  being  carried  out  almost  exclusively 
against  Catholics  and  the  Catholic  Church  at  this  time  should  not  blind 
our  fellow-citizens  to  the  fact  that  they  are  in  themselves  absolute  denials 
of  these  principles  upon  which  we  as  Americans  believe  that  just  govern- 
ment must  be  founded. 

The  present  Government  of  Mexico  won  its  way  to  power  by 
revolution,  and  has  been  strengthened  in  its  hold  upon  power  by  recogni- 
tion by  our  own  Government  of  the  United  States.  Before  such 
recognition  was  granted,  the  U.  S.  Secretary  of  State,  Mr.  Lansing, 
at  the  direction  of  the  United  States  Senate,  interrogated  the  then 
provisional  government  of  Mexico  as  to  whether  or  not  that  government 
would  guarantee  and  provide  religious  liberty  for  its  people.  The 
Mexican  Government  solenmly  pledged  itself  to  guarantee  religious 
liberty  according  to  the  Constitution  of  1857.  On  that  promise  our 
Government  granted  recognition.  No  sooner  was  it  won  than  the 
Government  of  Mexico  scrapped  the  Constitution  of  1857;  declared  a 
pre-constitutional  “period”  and  by  military  dictatorship  forced,  not 
through  popular  vote,  but  through  picked  convention,  the  Constitution 
of  1917.  The  present  Constitution  of  Mexico  was  imposed  on  Mexico 
by  a band  of  insurgents  at  a time  when  Mexico  was  prostrate  and  when 
the  rest  of  the  world  was  at  war. 

Despite  the  fact  that  in  1920  our  Government  was  again  forced  to 


60 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


suspend  diplomatic  relations  with  Mexico  and  did  not  resume  them  till 
1923  the  conditions  of  recognition  established  in  1917  were  still  obliga- 
tory on  Mexico.  Those  conditions,  which  underlie  all  negotiations  be- 
tween civilized  governments,  were  postulated,  as  promises  to  the 
agreements  which  were  later  on  entered  into  by  both  governments. 

We  are  amply  justified,  and  not  only  justified,  but,  as  is  every 
American,  obligated,  to  call  upon  our  Government  that  its  original 
request  upon  which  recognition  to  Mexico  was  granted,  be  lived  up  to 
by  the  Government  of  Mexico.  The  United  States  gave  recognition  to 
Mexico  on  Mexico’s  specific  promise  that  it  would  guarantee  religious 
liberty  to  all  its  citizens.  Mexico  has  not  kept  the  promise,  but,  on 
the  contrary,  her  government  has  entered  upon  a definite  campaign  of 
force  to  destroy  religious  liberty  and  is  intensifying  that  campaign  by 
striking  at  the  roots  of  religion — religious  education. 

No  American  can  view^  with  indifference  the  active  propaganda  of 
principles  that  are  subversive  of  our  own  Government;  that  will,  if 
persisted  in,  embitter  our  relations  with  the  whole  of  Latin-America. 

Where  religious  justice  is  violated,  there  can  be  no  political,  no 
civic  peace. 

The  situation  is  so  critical  that  we  call  upon  our  Catholic  people  not 
only  to  interest  themselves  as  a body,  but  to  hold  meetings  with  their 
own  Catholic  brethren  that  will  voice  the  protest  of  the  public ; that  will 
both  call  upon  our  own  Government  to  use  its  good  offices  to  see  that 
justice  is  restored  and  that  religious  and  educational  liberty  are  enjoyed 
by  the  people  of  Mexico. 

Edward  J.  Hanna,  Chairman,  Archbishop  of  San  Francisco,  Calif. 

Austin  Dowling,  Archbishop  of  St.  Paul,  Minn. 

P.  J.  Muldoon,  Vice-Chairman,  Bishop  of  Rockford,  111. 

Joseph  Schrembs,  Bishop  of  Cleveland,  Ohio 

Edmund  F.  Gibbons,  Bishop  of  Albany,  N.Y. 

Philip  R.  McDevitt,  Bishop  of  Harrisburg,  Penna. 

Thomas  F.  Lillis,  Bishop  of  Kansas  City,  Mo. 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


61 


LETTER  OF  THE  ADMINISTRATIVE  COMMITTEE 
NATIONAL  CATHOLIC  WELFARE  CONFERENCE  TO 
THE  PRESIDENT  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 

23  April,  1926 

Dear  Mr.  President: 

We,  the  undersigned  members  of  the  Administrative  Committee  of 
the  National  Catholic  Welfare  Conference,  representative  of  the  bishops, 
clergy  and  laity  of  the  United  States,  respectfully  manifest  to  Your 
Excellency  our  grave  concern,  the  distress  and  anxiety  we  feel,  because 
of  the  injury  and  the  growihg  danger  to  our  own  country  and  to  inter- 
nlatiohal  good  will  upon  this  hemisphere,  caused  by  the  present  conduct 
of  the  Government  of  Mexico. 

The  distress  we  feel  is  not  simply  our  own;  through  numberless 
petitions  from  organizations  of  our  own  religious  faith,  and  through 
petitions  from  those  not  of  our  faith,  the  increasing  critical  nature  of  the 
situation  has  been  brought  home  to  us. 

There  is  no  need  to  rehearse  here  the  provisions  of  the  present 
Mexican  Constitution  which  wipe  out  every  vestige  of  rehgious  liberty 
and  deny  to  every  priest  or  minister  of  the  gospel,  of  any  and  every 
denomination,  the  inalienable  rights  of  a free  man.  The  result  has  been 
the  setting  up  on  this  continent  of  a government  that  explicitly  denies 
the  principles  which  we  beheve  are  the  very  hfe  of  our  country.  And  the 
agents  of  that  Government  of  Mexico  are  disseminating  those  principles 
through  the  public  press  and  through  their  own  propaganda  literature. 

Political  opponents  of  the  said  Government  have  been  driven  into 
our  own  country,  or  have  taken  refuge  therein.  Their  presence  is  not 
conducive  to  peace. 

The  disturbed  conditions,  brought  about  in  great  measure  by  mis- 
government  in  Mexico,  have  driven  thousands  of  Mexicans  across  the 
border  into  our  own  country.  Up  to  the  present,  we  have  promoted 
good  will  with  the  Latin-American  republics  by  favorable  immigration 
laws.  The  increase  in  Mexican  immigration  has  already  intensified  a 
demand  for  a modification  of  our  inunigratJon  laws  with  regard  to  Mexico 
and  the  countries  of  Central  and  South  America.  Of  itself  such  agitation 
endangers  the  good  will  which  we  earnestly  wish  to  stand  as  a bond 
between  ourselves  and  those  countries. 

We  have  a unique  and  special  relation  to  Mexico  because  of  the 
positive  steps  our  Government  has  taken  at  different  times  in  history  to 
support  or  deny  support  to  this  or  that  government  in  Mexico. 

We  are  conscious  of  the  limitations  of  the  influence  of  one  govern- 


62 


THE  MEXICAN  PROBLEM 


merit  upon  another  and  the  courtesies  of  diplomatic  relations.  We  know- 
and  wish  to  give  public  appreciation  of  the  constant  effort  which  our  own 
Government  has  taken  to  voice  and  to  advance  American  principles 
whenever  suitable  opportunity  presented  itself.  We  know  of  the  deep 
interest  of  Your  Excellency  and  the  other  high  officials  of  the  Govern- 
ment in  the  individual  cases  that  have  been  brought  before  you  and  of  the 
measures  within  legitimate  influence  you  have  taken  to  ameliorate  the 
condition  of  American  citizens  who  have  suffered  in  Mexico  from 
religious  persecution.  We  petition  a continuation  of  those  good  offices 
and  of  your  watchful  interest. 

We  write  in  no  spirit  of  criticism ; nor  do  we  make  any  unwarranted 
demand.  We  wish  to  present  with  every  emphasis  our  grave  anxiety 
concerning  the  conditions  consequent  upon  the  present  conduct  of  the 
Mexican  Government  in  its  persecution  of  religion. 

We  need  not  add  that  we  possess  nothing  but  S3m[ipathy  and  love 
for  the  Mexican  people.  We  rejoice  in  their  national  aspirations,  in 
their  every  effort  to  promote  their  economic  and  social  betterment,  their 
union  and  development  as  a nation.  But  conscious  of  the  growing 
importance  of  the  problem  to  ourselves  as  a nation,  we  submit  our 
mind  to  you,  confident  that  you  will  do  all  in  your  power  to  aid  in  the 
solution  of  this  problem.  And  our  own  efforts  will  continue  to  be  directed 
to  the  end  that  the  same  principles  that  have  resulted  in  the  blessings 
of  freedom  to  us  may  be  accepted  by  other  nations,  and  thus  one  further 
bond  of  common  life  be  sealed  among  the  peoples  of  this  Western 
hemisphere. 

With  sentiments  of  deep  esteem. 

Respectfully  yours, 

(Signed)  4^  EDWARD  J.  HANNA, 

Chairman,  Archbishop  of  San  Francisco 
^ AUSTIN  DOWLING, 

' Treasurer,  Archbishop  of  St.  Paul 

^ P.  J.  MULDOON, 

Vice-Chairman,  Bishop  of  Rockford 
^ JOSEPH  SCHREMBS, 

Bishop  of  Cleveland 
^ EDMUND  F.  GIBBONS, 

Bishop  of  Albany 
^ PHILIP  R.  McDEVITT, 

Bishop  of  Harrisburg 
^ THOMAS  F.  LILLIS, 

Bishop  of  Kansas  City 


REPLY  OF  SECRETARY  OF  STATE 


April  27,  1926 

Dear  and  Right  Reverend  Bishop  : 

The  Reverend  John  J.  Burke,  C.S.P.,  General  Secretary  of  the 
National  Catholic  Welfare  Confemce,  has  forwarded  to  me,  by  your 
direction,  a letter  dated  the  23rd  instant,  addressed  to  the  President 
of  the  United  States  by  certain  members  of  the  Administrative  Com- 
mittee of  the  National  Catholic  Welfare  Conference,  representative  of 
the  bishops,  clergy  and  laity  of  the  United  States,  in  which  they  express 
their  concern  and  anxiety  because  of  the  Mexican  Government’s  policy 
with  respect  to  the  church  and  clergy. 

In  reply,  I desire  to  state  that  I have  carefully  noted  the  statements 
contained  in  the  letter  from  the  Administrative  Committee  and  I shall 
seek  an  opportunity  informally  to  bring  the  fact  of  your  protest  and  other 
like  protests  to  the  attention  of  the  Mexican  Ambassador  in  Washington. 

Very  sincerely  yours, 

(Signed)  FRANK  B.  KELLOGG 

The  Right  Reverend  P.  J.  Muldoon, 

1312  Massachusetts  Avenue, 

Washington,  D.  C. 


